Whitaker

facts, (6) whether the default was due to excusable neglect, and (7) the strong policy underlying the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure favoring decisions on the merits. 22 Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471–72 (9th Cir. 1986).

III. DISCUSSION

24 In analyzing this motion for default judgment, the Court must determine whether 25 (A) it has jurisdiction, (B) Whitaker gave the Lucky Store adequate notice, (C) the Eitel 26 factors support the entry of default judgment, and (D) the remedy that Whitaker seeks is 27 appropriate. A. Jurisdiction 1 The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 2 because the complaint alleges a violation of the ADA, a federal statute. See Compl. ¶ 5; 3 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1367, the Court has supplemental jurisdiction over 4 the related state law claim. 5 The Court also has specific personal jurisdiction over the Lucky Store, which is 6 continuously doing business in California, as Whitaker’s claims arise from that activity 7 within the forum state. Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, 564 U.S. 915, 8 923 (2011). 9 B. Notice 10 Under Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil…