Kansupda

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 AMIT KANSUPDA, Case No. 4:18-cv-02133-KAW

8 Plaintiff, ORDER RE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION

FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

9 v. Re: Dkt. No. 38 10 BAPTISTA DELIVERY SERVICES, LLC, et al., 11 Defendants. 12 13 On February 19, 2020, Plaintiff Amit Kansupda filed a motion for default judgment against 14 Defendants Baptista Delivery Services, LLC and Baptista Enterprises Transporting and Towing, 15 LLC (collectively “Defendants”). (Pl.’s Mot. for Default J., Dkt. No. 38.) This is Plaintiff’s 16 second motion for default judgment, as the first was denied due to Plaintiff’s failure to correctly 17 allege Plaintiff’s dates of employment. (See Order Den. Pl.’s Mot. for Default J. at 1, Dkt. No. 18 28.) Having considered the filings and the relevant legal authority, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s 19 motion for default judgment is still defective.1 20 First, Plaintiff again alleges the wrong dates of employment. In the operative complaint, 21 Plaintiff alleges that he worked “[f]rom…