The Board of Trustees et al v. C & L Coatings, Inc.

Filing 24

ORDER FOR PLAINTIFFS TO FILE PROPOSED FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW re 17 MOTION for Default Judgment by the Court as to Defendant C&L Coatings, Inc. filed by Laborers Pension Trust Fund for Northern California, Laborers Training and Retraining Trust Fund for Northern California, The Board of Trustees, Laborers Vacation-Holiday Trust Fund for Northern California. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 12/13/2012. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/13/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 Northern District of California 6 7 THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES ET AL, Plaintiff(s), 8 v. 9 No. C 12-01368 CW (MEJ) ORDER FOR PLAINTIFFS TO FILE PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW C & L COATINGS, INC., 10 Defendant(s). _____________________________________/ 12 For the Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 13 Plaintiffs are hereby ORDERED to file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law by 14 December 14, 2012 at noon. A copy of the proposed findings in either WordPerfect or Word format 15 must also be emailed to No chambers copies need to be submitted. 16 Plaintiffs’ submission shall be structured as outlined in Attachment A below, and shall include all 17 relevant legal authority and analysis necessary to establish the case. 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 21 Dated: December 13, 2012 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 _______________________________ Maria-Elena James Chief United States Magistrate Judge ATTACHMENT A 1 2 3 * * * 4 I. INTRODUCTION 5 (Relief sought and disposition.) 6 II. BACKGROUND 7 (The pertinent factual and procedural background, including citations to the Complaint and record.) 8 9 A. 10 III. DISCUSSION Jurisdiction and Service of Process 1. Subject Matter Jurisdiction 12 Code provisions and/or cases.) For the Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 (The basis for the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction, including citations to relevant United States 13 2. Personal Jurisdiction 14 (The basis for the Court’s personal jurisdiction. If seeking default judgment against any out-of-state 15 defendants, this shall include a minimum contacts analysis under Schwarzenegger v. Fred Martin 16 Motor Co., 374 F.3d 797, 802 (9th Cir. 2004)). 17 3. Service of Process 18 (The adequacy of the service of process on the party against whom default is requested, including 19 relevant provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4.) 20 B. Legal Standard 21 (An explanation of the default judgment standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2) and 22 the factors considered in the Ninth Circuit under Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 23 1986)). 24 C. Application to the Case at Bar 25 (A breakdown of each individual factor in Eitel, separated by numbered headings. Plaintiff shall 26 include citation to cases that are factually similar, preferably within the Ninth Circuit.) 27 28 2 1 D. Relief Sought 2 (An analysis of any relief sought, including damages, attorneys’ fees, etc. If attorneys’ fees and costs 3 are sought, the proposed findings shall include the following: (1) Evidence supporting the request for 4 hours worked, including a breakdown and identification of the subject matter of each person’s time 5 expenditures, accompanied by actual billing records and/or time sheets; (2) Documentation justifying 6 the requested billing rates, such as a curriculum vitae or resume; (3) Evidence that the requested rates 7 are in line with those prevailing in the community, including rate determinations in other cases of 8 similarly complex litigation, particularly those setting a rate for the plaintiff’s attorney; and (4) 9 Evidence that the requested hours are reasonable, including citations to other cases of similarly 10 complex litigation (preferably from this District)). IV. CONCLUSION 12 (Disposition, including any specific award amount(s) and judgment.) For the Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 13 * * * 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?