J & J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Ocampo
Filing
18
ORDER ADOPTING, with exception of the Damage Award 17 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ; ORDER DENYING IN PART and GRANTING IN PART Plaintiff's 16 Motion for Default Judgment ; Judgment to be entered In Favor of Plaintiff J&J Sports Productions, Inc. and Against Defendants Jose Luis Ocampo and Maricela Perez, individually and doing business as Ajua Cocina Mexicana, signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 11/21/2016. (Martin-Gill, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
J & J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC.,
12
Plaintiff,
13
v.
15
JOSE LUIS OCAMPO and MARCIELA
PEREZ, individually and doing business as
AJUA COCINA MEXICANA,
16
Defendants.
14
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 1:16-cv-00559 - LJO - JLT
ORDER ADOPTING THE FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS IN PART AND
GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT
(Docs. 16, 17)
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
J & J Sports Productions, Inc., seeks the entry of default judgment against Jose Luis Ocampo
and Maricela Perez, individually and doing business as Ajua Cocina Mexicana. (Doc. 16) On October
26, 2016, the assigned magistrate judge found the factors articulated by the Ninth Circuit in Eitel v.
McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 1986), weighed in favor of default judgment. (Doc. 17 at 37) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended Plaintiff’s motion be granted. (Id. at 10) The
magistrate judge specifically recommended imposition of statutory damages in the amount of $10,000.
(Id. at 7-8)
The parties were given fourteen days to file any objections to the recommendation that the
action be dismissed. (Doc. 17 at 10) In addition, the parties were “advised that failure to file
objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order.” (Id.,
28
1
1
citing Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991); Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 834 (9th
2
Cir. 2014)). To date, no objections have been filed.
3
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi Valley United
4
School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), this Court conducted a de novo review of the case.
5
Having carefully reviewed the file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations (“F&Rs”) are
6
supported by the record and proper analysis with the exception of the ultimate damages award. As the
7
F&Rs explained, the Court may consider a number of factors in determining the amount of damages,
8
including any promotional advertising by the defendant, the capacity of the establishment, the number
9
of patrons present at the time of the broadcast, the imposition of a cover charge, the number and size of
10
the crowd who viewed the broadcast, and whether a premium was charged on food or drink. See J & J
11
Sports Prods. Inc. v. Corona, No. 1:12-CV-01844-AWI, 2013 WL 3481697, at *5 (E.D. Cal. July 10,
12
2013) (citing Kingvision Pay–Per–View, Ltd. v. Backman, 102 F. Supp. 2d 1196, 1198 (N.D. Cal.
13
2000)). Here, there is no evidence that Ajua Cocina Mexicana advertised that it would broadcast the
14
event, charged a cover charge or otherwise charged a premium for food and drink. Plaintiff’s own
15
evidence reveals that the capacity of the restaurant was no more than 45 persons and that no more than
16
25 persons were present in the restaurant at any given time. Comparing this case to other similar cases,
17
e.g., J & J Sports Prods., Inc. v. Morales, No. 1:10-CV-01694-AWI, 2012 WL 761670, at *3 (E.D. Cal.
18
Mar. 8, 2012) (awarding $4,400 in statutory damages with no enhanced damages where bar that could
19
seat 60 persons displayed program licensable at $2,200 on three televisions to a crowd of no more than
20
fourteen patrons without cover charge or other premium charges); Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Garcia,
21
No. CV F 11-2030 LJO, 2013 WL 5934343, at *6 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 5, 2013) (awarding $5,000 in
22
statutory damages where establishment that could seat up to 50 persons showed program licensable at
23
$900 on one television to a crowd of 25-30 persons, without charging a cover charge or other
24
premiums), the Court finds a statutory damages award in the amount of $5,000 is more appropriate.
25
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
26
1.
27
The Findings and Recommendations dated October 26, 2016 (Doc. 17) are ADOPTED
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE DAMAGES AWARD;
28
2
1
2.
Plaintiff’s application for default judgment (Doc. 16) is granted in part and denied in
2
part, as follows:
3
A.
Plaintiff’s request for statutory damages for the violation of the
Communications Act is GRANTED in the amount of $5,000;
4
5
B.
Plaintiff’s request for enhanced damages is DENIED; and
6
C.
Plaintiff’s request for damages for the tort of conversion is DENIED;
7
3.
Judgment SHALL be entered in favor of Plaintiff J & J Sports Productions, Inc. and
8
against Defendants Jose Luis Ocampo and Maricela Perez, individually and doing
9
business as Ajua Cocina Mexicana; and
10
4.
Plaintiff SHALL file any application for attorney’s fees pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 605 no
later than fourteen days from the entry of judgment.
11
12
13
14
15
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____
November 21, 2016
UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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?