Barlow v. Herman et al
Filing
92
ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 91 Plaintiff Randall Bruce Barlow's Renewed Motion for Clerk's Entry of Default Against Defendant Willow Creek San Martin Building, LLC is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court must enter default as to Defendant Willow Creek San Martin Building, LLC. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 12/20/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
1
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
4
******
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
RANDALL BRUCE BARLOW,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
vs.
)
)
DONALD S. HERMAN, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)
Case No. 2:13-cv-00033-JAD-CWH
ORDER
Presently before the court is Plaintiff Randall Bruce Barlow’s Renewed Motion for Clerk’s
13
Entry of Default Against Defendant Willow Creek San Martin Building, LLC (ECF No. 91), filed on
14
December 15, 2016. The court previously denied Plaintiff’s request for the entry of default as to
15
Defendant Willow Creek San Martin Building, LLC because that defendant had filed a notice of
16
bankruptcy and the parties’ attorneys were unable to update the court regarding the status of the
17
bankruptcy. (Order (ECF No. 89).) Plaintiff now provides the bankruptcy court’s order granting
18
Willow Creek San Martin Building, LLC’s motion for voluntary dismissal of its bankruptcy case.
19
(Renewed Mot. for Entry of Default (ECF No. 91) at Exs. 4-5.) In light of the bankruptcy dismissal
20
order, the court will grant the renewed motion.
21
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff Randall Bruce Barlow’s Renewed Motion for
22
Clerk’s Entry of Default Against Defendant Willow Creek San Martin Building, LLC (ECF No. 91) is
23
GRANTED.
24
25
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court must enter default as to Defendant Willow
Creek San Martin Building, LLC.
26
27
28
DATED: December 20, 2016
______________________________________
C.W. Hoffman, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge
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?