Joseph

Joseph v. Montegrande

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 15, 20245:22-cv-03576California847 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ALONZO JOSEPH, Case No. 22-cv-03576-PCP

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR

v. DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND

SANCTIONS, AND GRANTING

FAYE MONTEGRANDE, MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME Defendant. Re: Dkt. Nos. 20, 25,

12 In this pro se civil rights action, Defendant was ordered to file an answer to Plaintiff’s complaint by September 11, 2023, and to file a dispositive motion by November 9, 2023. See Dkt. No 12 (establishing schedule). When Defendant failed timely to file her answer, Plaintiff moved for default judgment. Dkt. No. 20. Defendant filed her answer on November 13, 2023. Dkt. No. 21. Factors which may be considered by courts in exercising discretion 18 as to the entry of a default judgment include: (1) the possibility of prejudice to the plaintiff, (2) the merits of plaintiff's substantive claim, (3) the sufficiency of the complaint, (4) the sum of money at stake in the action;…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.