Huveldt v. BMW North America LLC et al

Filing 33

ORDER denying Plaintiff's 29 Motion for Default Judgment. The Clerk of Court isdirected to close the case. Signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (MJV)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

6
7
8

NATHAN HUVELDT,
CASE NO. 2:23-cv-00355-RSL

9

Plaintiff,
v.

10
11
12
13

JAKE SWEENEY CHEVEROLETIMPORTS, INC. (d/b/a JAKE SWEENEY
BMW and BMW OF CINCINNATI
NORTH),

ORDER

Defendant.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

This matter comes before the Court on “Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment
Against Defendant Jake Sweeney Chevrolet-Imports, Inc. (d/b/a Jake Sweeney BMW and
BMW of Cincinnati North).” Dkt. # 29. Jake Sweeney Chevrolet-Imports, Inc.
(“Sweeney”) has not appeared in this action, and its default was entered on April 25, 2023.
Dkt. # 15. Having considered the motion, the supporting declarations, the remaining
record, and the applicable law, the Court finds as follows:

22
23
24
25
26

BACKGROUND
Plaintiff filed his complaint against Sweeney and two other defendants on March
10, 2023, alleging that defendants breached their contractual and statutory obligations
when they refused to repair plaintiff’s 2018 BMW Certified X6 M after it suffered an
engine failure during the warranty period. Sweeney is an Ohio corporation that sells and
ORDER - 1

1
2

services luxury vehicles in Ohio. Dkt. # 1 at ¶ 8. Plaintiff, a Washington resident,
purchased his X6 M from Sweeney in Ohio. Dkt. # 1 at ¶¶ 6 and 10.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

DISCUSSION
“When entry of judgment is sought against a party who has failed to plead or
otherwise defend, a district court has an affirmative duty to look into its jurisdiction over
both the subject matter and the parties.” In re Tuli, 172 F.3d 707, 712 (9th Cir. 1999). See
also Flores v. Flores, 590 F. Supp. 3d 1373, 1379 (W.D. Wash. 2022) (“Before entering
default judgment, the Court must confirm that it has both subject matter and personal
jurisdiction.”). Plaintiff does not allege, nor has he made a showing, that the Court has
personal jurisdiction over Sweeney.

11
12
13
14
15

CONCLUSION
There being no indication that the Court has either general or specific jurisdiction
over Sweeney, the Court lacks the power to adjudicate the claims asserted against that
defendant. The motion for default judgment is therefore DENIED. The Clerk of Court is
directed to close the case.

16
17

Dated this 5th day of June, 2024.

18
19

Robert S. Lasnik
United States District Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ORDER - 2