NewPark Mall LLC v. CRGE Newpark Mall, LLC et al

Filing 15

ORDER FOR PARTIES TO MEET AND CONFER re 14 MOTION to Set Aside Default. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 4/30/2015. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/30/2015)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

NEWPARK MALL LLC,

Case No. 15-cv-00817-MEJ

Plaintiff,
8

ORDER RE: MOTION TO SET ASIDE
DEFAULT

v.
9
10

CRGE NEWPARK MALL, LLC, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 14

Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Plaintiff NewPark Mall filed this breach of contract case against Defendants CRGE

14

NewPark Mall and Boomtown Entertainment on February 23, 2015. Less than six weeks later,

15

Plaintiff requested that the Clerk of Court enter default against both Defendants for failure to

16

timely respond. Dkt. No. 11. The Clerk entered default on April 7, 2015, after which Plaintiff

17

filed a Motion for Default Judgment by the Clerk, which remains pending. Dkt. Nos. 12, 13.

18

Defendants have now filed a Motion to Set Aside Default. Dkt. No. 14.

19

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(c) provides that a court “may set aside an entry of

20

default for good cause.” The district court has discretion to determine whether a party

21

demonstrates “good cause.” Madsen v. Bumb, 419 F.2d 4, 6 (9th Cir. 1969). The court’s

22

discretion is particularly broad where a party seeks to set aside an entry of default rather than a

23

default judgment. Mendoza v. Wight Vineyard Mgmt., 783 F.2d 941, 945 (9th Cir. 1986). In

24

evaluating whether a party has demonstrated good cause, a district court may consider the

25

following factors: (1) whether the defendant’s culpable conduct led to the default; (2) whether the

26

defendant has a meritorious defense; and (3) whether setting aside the default would prejudice the

27

plaintiff. TCI Grp. Life Ins. Plan v. Knoebber, 244 F.3d 691, 696 (9th Cir. 2001). Whenever

28

“timely relief is sought . . . and the movant has a meritorious defense,” a court must resolve any

1

doubt in favor of setting aside the default. Mendoza, 783 F.2d at 945-46. The party seeking to

2

vacate the entry of default bears the burden of demonstrating that these factors favor doing so.

3

TCI, 244 F.3d at 696.

4

As it is preferable to focus on the merits of a case, the Court hereby VACATES the

5

briefing deadlines and June 25, 2015 hearing for Defendants’ motion. The Court ORDERS the

6

parties to meet and confer to determine whether they can reach an agreement to set aside default.

7

Given that this case is in the early stages of litigation and a cursory review of Defendants’ motion

8

shows that they can likely establish good cause to set aside default, the Court advises Plaintiff that

9

it is likely to grant Defendants’ motion. The parties shall meet and confer by May 8, 2015, and
thereafter file either a stipulation to set aside default or a request to place Defendants’ motion back

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

on calendar by May 13, 2015.

12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14
15
16

Dated: April 30, 2015
______________________________________
MARIA-ELENA JAMES
United States Magistrate Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2