Axis Reinsurance Company v. Telekenex, Inc. et al

Filing 136

ORDER re 128 MOTION for Default Judgment by the Court as to Defendants Mark Prudell and Joy Prudell filed by Axis Reinsurance Company, 130 MOTION for Default Judgment by the Court as to Defendants Joshua Summers and Julia Summers filed by Axis Reinsurance Company, 129 MOTION for Default Judgment by the Court as to Defendants Mark Radford and Nikki Radford filed by Axis Reinsurance Company. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 1/28/13. (sclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/28/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

AXIS REINSURANCE COMPANY,
Plaintiff,

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

v.
TELEKENEX, INC.; ANTHONY ZABIT;
KAREN SALAZAR; BRANDON CHANEY;
DEANNA CHANEY; MARK PRUDELL; JOY
PRUDELL; MARK RADFORD; NIKKI
RADFORD; JOSHUA SUMMERS; JULIA
SUMMERS; IXC HOLDINGS, INC.;
STRAITSHOT COMMUNICATIONS, INC.;
and STRAITSHOT RC, LLC,

18
Defendants.
19

) Case No. 12-2979 SC
)
) ORDER RE MOTIONS FOR
) DEFAULT JUDGMENT
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

20
21

Plaintiff now moves for entry of default judgment against

22

Defendants Mark and Joy Prudell, ECF No. 128, Mark and Nikki

23

Radford, ECF No. 129, and Joshua and Julia Summers, ECF No. 130.

24

"When a court is considering whether to enter a default judgment,

25

it may dismiss an action sua sponte for lack of personal

26

jurisdiction."

27

the instant action, it is unclear how the Court can assert personal

28

jurisdiction over the Prudells, the Radfords, or the Summers.

In re Tuli, 172 F.3d 707, 712 (9th Cir. 1999).

In

1

According to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, all six

2

defendants reside in Washington.

3

Plaintiff has not explained what connection they have to

4

California.

5

a supplemental brief on personal jurisdiction within seven (7) days

6

of the signature date of this Order.

7

ten (10) pages.

8

denial of the pending motions for default judgment.

ECF No. 15 ("FAC") ¶¶ 6-8.

Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS Plaintiff to file

The brief shall not exceed

Failure to file a supplemental brief may result in

9

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11
12
13

Dated: January 28, 2014
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2