Leprino Foods Company v. JND Thomas Company, Inc., et al.
ORDER re 30 & 31 , signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 1/31/17. (Marrujo, C)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
LEPRINO FOODS COMPANY,
Case No. 1:16-cv-01181-LJO-SAB
(ECF Nos. 30, 31)
JND THOMAS COMPANY, INC., et al.,
Plaintiff Leprino Foods Company filed the complaint in this action on August 10, 2016.
11 (ECF No. 1.) After entry of default against Defendants JND Thomas Company, Inc. and Dennis
12 Thomas, Plaintiff filed a motion for entry of default judgment which was referred to a United
13 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. (ECF Nos.
14 13-16.) After the magistrate judge issued an order requiring Plaintiff to show cause why this
15 action should not be dismissed due to pleading deficiencies, Plaintiff filed a first amended
16 complaint on December 16, 2016. (ECF No. 19, 20.) Plaintiff filed supplemental pleadings in
17 support of the motion for entry of default judgment on December 22, 2106. On December 29,
18 2016, an order issued granting Plaintiff the opportunity to file additional supplemental briefing.
19 (ECF No. 28.) On January 6, 2017, Plaintiff filed a supplemental brief. (ECF No. 29.)
On January 12, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations (F&Rs).
21 The F&Rs recommended that default judgment be entered against Defendant JND Thomas
22 Company, Inc., but found that Plaintiff failed to state a claim against Defendant Dennis Thomas.
23 The F&Rs were served on the parties and contained notice that any objections to the findings and
24 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days (14) days from the date of service. On
25 January 24, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion to amend the complaint and a memorandum objecting
26 to the recommendation that entry of default judgment be denied as to Defendant Dennis Thomas.
27 (ECF Nos. 31, 32.)
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted
a de novo review of this case.
supplemental declaration of Plaintiff’s counsel filed on January 30, 2017 (ECF No. 34), which
further justifies the hourly rate used to calculate the attorney fee award, the Court adopts the
F&Rs as to Defendant JND Thomas Company, Inc., as supported by the record and by proper
analysis. The Court holds in abeyance the remainder of the F&Rs as to Defendant Dennis
Thomas, pending resolution of the pending motion to amend.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
The F&Rs, filed January 12, 2017, is ADOPTED IN PART;
Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default judgment against Defendant Dennis Thomas
is HELD IN ABEYANCE pending resolution of the pending motion to amend;
Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default judgment against Defendant JND Thomas
Company, Inc. is GRANTED as follows:
costs in the amount of $560.75 for a total judgment of $110,804.78;
The judgment against Defendant JND Thomas Company, Inc. includes
post judgment interest;
The claim for declaratory relief is GRANTED and Defendant JND
Thomas Company, Inc.is responsible for all future costs to remediate or
comply with the CAO, including legal and consulting costs; and
24 IT IS SO ORDERED.
Judgment is entered against JND Thomas Company, Inc. for damages in
the amount of $88,844.03, attorney fees in the amount of 21,400.00; and
Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including the
Any further money judgment according to this court’s declaration must be
enforced by further and separate court action.
January 31, 2017
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____
UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
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?