Perez v. Escalante

Filing 20

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - IT IS RECOMMENDED that a District Judge for the PhoenixDivision grant Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. #16 ). IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Court enter default judgment infavor of Plaintiff Danielle Perez and against Defendant Manuel Soto Escalante as stated in this order. This recommendation is not an order that is immediately appealable to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. (See document for complete details). Signed by Magistrate Judge David K Duncan on 4/12/18. (SLQ)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Danielle Perez,

No. CV-17-1574-PHX-DKD

Plaintiff,

10
11

v.

12

Manuel Soto Escalante,

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

13

Defendant.

14
15

TO THE HONORABLE STEPHEN M. MCNAMEE, SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE:

16

On December 4, 2017, Plaintiff filed an Application for Entry of Default and the

17

Clerk of the Court entered default on December 5, 2017 (Docs. 11, 12). This matter

18

having come before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 16), and

19

the Court having reviewed the pleadings on the issue of the relief to be awarded to

20

Plaintiff, and the evidence presented by Plaintiff, finds that Defendant Manuel Soto

21

Escalante was served with Plaintiff’s summons and complaint, but failed to appear or

22

otherwise defend this matter. Plaintiff is entitled to judgment against Defendant.

23
24

Accordingly, IT IS RECOMMENDED that a District Judge for the Phoenix
Division grant Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 16).

25

IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Court enter default judgment in

26

favor of Plaintiff Danielle Perez and against Defendant Manuel Soto Escalante as

27

follows:

28

1
2

A.

and Thirty Dollars and Zero Cents ($47,430.00);

3
4

B.

C.

For Plaintiff’s costs in the amount of Six Hundred and Eighty Four Dollars

and Seventy Cents ($684.70); and

7
8

For Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees in the amount of Two Thousand Two

Hundred and Twelve Dollars ($2,212.00);

5
6

For Plaintiff’s damages in the sum of Forty Seven Thousand Four Hundred

D.

For post-judgment interest on the above amounts at the rate of 2.07% per

annum.

9

This recommendation is not an order that is immediately appealable to the Ninth

10

Circuit Court of Appeals. Any notice of appeal pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1), Federal Rules

11

of Appellate Procedure, should not be filed until entry of the district court’s judgment.

12

The parties shall have fourteen days from the date of service of a copy of this

13

recommendation within which to file specific written objections with the Court. See, 28

14

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Rules 72, 6(a), 6(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Thereafter,

15

the parties have fourteen days within which to file a response to the objections. Failure

16

timely to file objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation may

17

result in the acceptance of the Report and Recommendation by the district court without

18

further review. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003).

19

Failure timely to file objections to any factual determinations of the Magistrate Judge will

20

be considered a waiver of a party’s right to appellate review of the findings of fact in an

21

order or judgment entered pursuant to the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. See

22

Rule72, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

23

Dated this 12th day of April, 2018.

24
25
26
27
28

cc:

SMM

-2-