Tenorio et al v. Gallardo et al

Filing 76

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS STRIKING the Answer of Kern County Cultivation, Inc. and ENTERING Default 71 , signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/26/17. (Hellings, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LUCARIA TENORIO, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 1:16-cv-0283-DAD-JLT v. GABRIEL GALLARDO SR., et al., 15 Defendants. 16 ORDER ADOPTING THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS STRIKING THE ANSWER OF KERN COUNTY CULTIVATION, INC. AND ENTERING DEFAULT (Doc. No. 71) 17 18 19 On May 10, 2017, the court granted the motion of counsel to withdraw from their 20 representation of defendants Gabriel Gallardo, Sr., Manuel Gallardo, Silvia Gallardo, and Kern 21 County Cultivation, Inc. (Doc. No. 60.)1 In that order, the court noted that as a corporation, Kern 22 County Cultivation, Inc., would have to retain new counsel to proceed in this action because a 23 corporation may not appear without counsel. (Id.) On June 22, 2017, the assigned magistrate 24 judge issued an order requiring defendant Kern County Cultivation, Inc. to show cause why 25 sanctions, including the striking of its answer and the entry of default against it, should not be 26 imposed due to its failure to comply by appearing through new counsel. Nonetheless, defendant 27 28 1 As noted in that order, Silvia Gallardo signed the declaration on behalf of defendant Kern County Cultivation, Inc. as its President. (See Doc. No. 54 at 3.) 1 1 Kern County Cultivation, Inc. failed to respond to the order to show cause or to appear in this 2 action through new counsel. Therefore, on August 3, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge issued 3 findings and recommendations recommending that defendant Kern County Cultivation, Inc.’s 4 answer be stricken and default be entered against it. (Doc. No. 71.) 5 The parties were given fourteen days to file any objections to the findings and 6 recommendations. (Doc. No. 71 at 4.) In addition, the parties were “advised that failure to file 7 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order.” 8 (Id.) To date, no objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation have been filed. 9 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this court conducted a de 10 novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and 11 recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 12 13 14 Accordingly, 1. The findings and recommendations dated August 3, 2017 (Doc. No. 71) are adopted in full; 15 2. Defendant Kern County Cultivation, Inc.’s answer (Doc. No. 52) is stricken; and 16 3. The Clerk of Court is directed enter default against defendant Kern County Cultivation, 17 18 19 Inc. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 26, 2017 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?