Jiuzhou Jena Co., LTD v. EZSupply INC.

Filing 15

ORDER granting Plaintiff's ECF No. 11 Motion for Default Judgment. Submission of Proposed Order due with 7 days. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 5/19/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 10 *** 11 JIUZHOU JENA CO., LTD, a Delaware corporation, 12 Case No. 2:16-cv-00142-MMD-NJK ORDER Plaintiff, 13 14 15 16 v. EZSUPPLY INC., a Nevada corporation d/b/a EZ CORPORATION and DOES 110, inclusive, Defendants. 17 18 This action arises from Defendant EZSupply Inc.’s alleged failure to pay for 19 consumer electronics products purchased from Plaintiff Jiuzhou Jena Co. Ltd. (ECF No. 20 1.) Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment. (ECF No. 11.) The Court 21 has reviewed the Complaint, proof of service on Defendant and the Motion and exhibits 22 attached thereto. (ECF Nos. 1, 6, 11, 12, 13.) The Court finds that default judgment is 23 proper. Plaintiff has satisfied the procedural requirements for default judgment pursuant 24 to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b). The Clerk properly entered a default against Defendant pursuant 25 to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a) because Defendant has failed to appear after having been 26 properly served. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff has also satisfied the factors for obtaining default 27 judgment articulated in Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471 (9th Cir. 1986). Plaintiff’s 28 Motion demonstrates that it is entitled to default judgment in the amount of $5,188,892.50. 1 It is therefore ordered that Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (ECF No. 11) is 2 granted. Plaintiff is directed to submit a proposed order granting its motion within seven 3 (7) days. 4 5 DATED THIS 19th day of May 2017. 6 MIRANDA M. DU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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?