Oppenheimer v. Boulevards New Media, Inc. et al
Filing
28
ORDER AFFORDING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO FILE SURREPLY; CONTINUING HEARING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE ENTRY OF DEFAULT; CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. Oppenheimer is afforded leave to file, no later than November 20, 2015, a sur reply. The hearing on the motion to set aside the default is continued to December 18, 2015, at 9:00 a.m. Further, the Case Management Conference is continued from December 18, 2015, to February 5, 2016, at 10:30 a.m.; a Case Management Statement shall be filed no later than January 29, 2016. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on November 10, 2015. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/10/2015)
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
11
DAVID GORDON OPPENHEIMER,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
No. C-15-3676 MMC
ORDER AFFORDING PLAINTIFF LEAVE
TO FILE SURREPLY; CONTINUING
HEARING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION
TO SET ASIDE ENTRY OF DEFAULT;
CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE
v.
BOULEVARDS NEW MEDIA, INC.,
Defendant.
/
16
17
Before the Court is defendant Boulevards New Media, Inc.’s (“Boulevards”) “Motion
18
to Set Aside Entry of Default,” filed October 7, 2015, and renoticed October 21, 2015.
19
Plaintiff David Gordon Oppenheimer (“Oppenheimer”) has filed opposition, to which
20
Boulevards has replied. Having read and considered the papers filed in support of and in
21
opposition to the motion, the Court, for the reasons stated below, finds it appropriate to
22
afford Oppenheimer leave to file a surreply.
23
On October 2, 2015, the Clerk of Court, upon application by Oppenheimer, entered
24
the default of Boulevards. By the instant motion, Boulevards seeks an order setting aside
25
the entry of default. Pursuant to Rule 55 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a “court
26
may set aside an entry of default for good cause.” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(c). In
27
determining whether good cause exists, “the district court should consider whether: (1) the
28
plaintiff would be prejudiced by setting aside the default; (2) the defendant has a
1
meritorious defense; and, (3) the defendant’s culpable conduct led to the default.” See
2
O’Connor v. Nevada, 27 F.3d 357, 364 (9th Cir. 1994).
3
Here, with its reply brief, Boulevards has offered evidence bearing on the second
4
and third of the above-referenced three factors. In particular, Boulevards has filed a
5
declaration by its Chief Executive Officer, Dan Pulcrano, to show Boulevards did not
6
engage in culpable conduct (see Pulcrano Decl., filed October 28, 2015; Def.’s Reply at 9:5
7
- 10:11) and a proposed answer to the complaint, to show Boulevards has a meritorious
8
defense (see Adler Decl. Ex. A); see also In re Stone, 588 F.2d 1316, 1319-20 (10th Cir.
9
1978) (holding defendant has burden to offer “factual allegations sufficient to support a
10
meritorious defense”; noting such allegations may be set forth “in an appended proposed
11
answer”); Cassidy v. Tenorio, 856 F.2d 1412, 1416-17 (9th Cir. 1988) (citing favorably to
12
standard set forth in In re Stone). Given the manner in which the above-referenced
13
evidence was submitted, however, Oppenheimer has not had an opportunity to respond
14
thereto. Under the circumstances, the Court will afford Oppenheimer leave to file a
15
surreply.
16
Specifically, Oppenheimer is hereby afforded leave to file, no later than November
17
20, 2015, a surreply not exceed five pages in length, limited to a response to the
18
statements made in the Declaration of Dan Pulcrano and the allegations set forth in the
19
proposed answer.
20
In light of the above, the hearing on the motion to set aside the default is hereby
21
CONTINUED to December 18, 2015, at 9:00 a.m. Further, the Case Management
22
Conference is hereby CONTINUED from December 18, 2015, to February 5, 2016, at
23
10:30 a.m.; a Case Management Statement shall be filed no later than January 29, 2016.
24
IT IS SO ORDERED.
25
26
Dated: November 10, 2015
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States 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?