J&J Sports Productions, Inc v. Trujillo

Filing 22

ORDER by Judge Lucy H. Koh denying 13 Motion to Strike (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Mailing) (lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/6/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 J & J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) ) JOSEFINA TRUJILLO A/K/A JOSEFINA A. ) TRUJILLO, INDIVIDUALLY and d/b/a THE ) ROUNDUP A/K/A PARAISO NIGHT CLUB, ) ) Defendant. ) ) Case No.: 11-CV-01159-LHK ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STRIKE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Plaintiff J&J Sports Productions, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Josefina 18 Trujillo a/k/a Josefina A. Trujillo d/b/a The Roundup, aka Paraiso Night Club (“Defendant”) on 19 March 10, 2011. Defendant filed a proof of service indicating that Defendant had filed the Answer 20 on Plaintiff. See ECF No. 12. Defendant has never filed the Answer with the Court. 21 Plaintiff filed a motion to strike the affirmative defenses in Defendant’s Answer on July 19, 22 2011. A case management conference was held on July 27, 2011, at which Defendant failed to 23 appear. At the case management conference, Defendant was ordered to (1) file a copy of her 24 Answer by August 3, 2011, and (2) respond to Plaintiff’s motion to strike by August 5, 2011. 25 Defendant has, to date, failed to comply with both court orders. Plaintiff filed a status report on 26 October 5, 2011 indicating that he had not yet been in contact with Defendant, and that Defendant 27 had never, in fact, served Plaintiff with a copy of Defendant’s Answer. ECF No. 21. Plaintiff 28 offered no explanation as to why, if Plaintiff was never served with the Answer, Plaintiff filed a 1 Case No.: 11-CV-01159-LHK ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STRIKE 1 motion to strike affirmative defenses. On October 5, 2011, Plaintiff also moved for an entry of 2 default in this case. ECF No. 20. 3 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to strike, set for hearing on October 13, 2011. 4 The Defendant has yet to file, and apparently serve, her Answer. Therefore, the motion to strike is 5 premature, and is DENIED without prejudice. The hearing set for October 13, 2011 is 6 VACATED. 7 A further case management conference is set for January 11, 2012 at 2:00 p.m. If 8 Defendant moves for an entry of default judgment, the case management conference will be reset 9 to the hearing date set for the entry of default judgment. United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 Dated: October 6, 2011 _________________________________ LUCY H. KOH United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Case No.: 11-CV-01159-LHK ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STRIKE

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?