Leprino Foods Company v. JND Thomas Company, Inc., et al.

Filing 35

ORDER re 30 & 31 , signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 1/31/17. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 LEPRINO FOODS COMPANY, 5 6 Case No. 1:16-cv-01181-LJO-SAB Plaintiff, ORDER v. (ECF Nos. 30, 31) 7 JND THOMAS COMPANY, INC., et al., 8 Defendants. 9 10 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.) 20 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.) 28 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 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: 1. The F&Rs, filed January 12, 2017, is ADOPTED IN PART; 2. Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default judgment against Defendant Dennis Thomas is HELD IN ABEYANCE pending resolution of the pending motion to amend; 2. Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default judgment against Defendant JND Thomas Company, Inc. is GRANTED as follows: 14 a. 15 costs in the amount of $560.75 for a total judgment of $110,804.78; 17 b. 18 The judgment against Defendant JND Thomas Company, Inc. includes post judgment interest; 19 c. 20 The claim for declaratory relief is GRANTED and Defendant JND Thomas Company, Inc.is responsible for all future costs to remediate or 21 comply with the CAO, including legal and consulting costs; and 22 d. 23 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 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 16 25 Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including the Dated: 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 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?