J & J Sports Productions, Inc v. Matti et al

Filing 15

ORDER denying without prejudice 14 Motion for Default Judgment. Signed by District Judge Paul D. Borman. (DTof)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
J & J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC.,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 13-13963
Paul D. Borman

v.
United States District Judge
BADER MATTI,
Defendant.
___________________________/
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
DEFAULT JUDGMENT WITHOUT PREJUDICE (ECF No. 14)
This action arises from Plaintiff J & J Sports Productions, Inc.’s (“Plaintiff’) allegation
that Defendant Bader Matti violated federal law by illegally broadcasting a boxing match at his
bar. Defendant Matti has failed to defend or otherwise appear in this action and Plaintiff now
moves this Court for entry of a Default Judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
55(b)(2). (ECF No. 14)
On September 16, 2013, Plaintiff filed its complaint against Defendant Matti and also
against 150 West Café, LLC. (ECF No. 1, Compl. ¶¶ 6-8). Plaintiff alleges in its complaint that
it has the exclusive nationwide television distribution rights for the “‘Star Power’ Floyd
Mayweather, Jr. v. Victor Ortiz, Championship Fight Program” that was telecast nationwide on
Saturday, September 17, 2011. (Compl. ¶ 10). Plaintiff claims that Defendants illegally
broadcast this Program to the patrons of 150 West Café on September 17, 2011 in violation of
the Communication Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 605, et seq., and the Cable & Televison
Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 553, et seq. (Id. at ¶¶
9-24). Plaintiff also claims that the broadcast constituted conversion. (Id. at ¶¶ 24-27).

Plaintiff states Defendant Matti was personally served with the summons and complaint
in this action on November 3, 2013. (Pl.’s Mot., Ex. B, signed Return of Service Form).
Plaintiff further states that it moved to voluntarily dismiss Defendant 150 West Café, LLC from
this action after discovering that Defendant 150 West Café, LLC had been dissolved pursuant to
a state court ordered receivership. (Pl.’s Br. at 3; ECF No. 9, Order Dismissing 150 West Café,
LLC). On January 22, 2014, Plaintiff requested entry of clerk’s default against Defendant Matti.
(ECF No. 7). This request was granted on January 23, 2014. (ECF No. 8).
Once a clerk’s entry of default is obtained pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
55(a), the party may then file for a default judgment by the clerk or by the court. FED. R. CIV. P.
55(b). When the plaintiff’s complaint alleges damages for a sum certain a default judgment by
clerk is appropriate. FED. R. CIV. P. 55(b)(1). “In all other cases, the party must apply to the
court for a default judgment.” FED. R. CIV. P. 55(b)(2). Although Rule 55(b)(2) does not
provide a standard to determine when a party is entitled to a judgment by default, the case law
sets forth that the court must exercise “sound judicial discretion” when determining whether to
enter the judgment. Wright & Miller, 10A Federal Practice & Procedure, § 2685 (3d ed. 1998)
(collecting cases).
Plaintiff now moves this Court to enter a default judgment against Defendant Matti in the
amount of “$110,000.00, plus attorney’s fees and court costs in the amount of $2,540.00, as
provided by 47 U.S.C. 553, et seq. and 47 U.S.C. 605, et seq.”. (Pl.’s Mot. at ¶ 8). In support of
its motion for default judgment Plaintiff states that Defendant Matti illegally broadcast the
Mayweather versus Cotto program (and/or its under-card preliminary bouts) in the 150 West
Café, LLC, on May 5, 2012 and attaches an affidavit to support this allegation. (Pl.’s Br. 1-4,

2

Ex. E, Taylor Aff. at ¶ 3). However, Plaintiff’s complaint alleges Defendant Matti violated the
law by illegally broadcasting a different program (the Mayweather versus Ortiz program) on a
different date (September 17, 2011). (See Compl. ¶ 10).
Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment fails to set forth or support the factual
basis of the legal violations asserted in the Complaint. Accordingly, it would not be within the
“sound judicial discretion” of this Court to grant Plaintiff’s request for a the entry of a default
judgment and the Court DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s motion for default
judgment (ECF No. 14).
SO ORDERED.

s/Paul D. Borman
PAUL D. BORMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: August 5, 2014
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney or
party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on August 5, 2014.

s/Deborah Tofil
Case Manager

3