Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06237/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06237-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed Question: Fed Communications Act of 1934

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DIRECTV, INC., a California corporation, CASE NO. CV-F-04-6237 OWW TAG

Plaintiff, ORDER TO ADOPT FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS ON PLAINTIFF’S 

vs. APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

LEWIS ESCALANTE, (Doc. 9)

Defendant.

 /

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff DIRECTV, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) is the nation’s leading direct broadcast satellite system,

with more than 10 million customers. Plaintiff’s television programming currently includes major

cable networks, studio movies and special events programming, as well as a variety of sports and

other special interests programming. Plaintiff offers its television programming to residential and

business customers on a subscription and pay-per-view basis only. Each customer is required to

create an account with Plaintiff, and to obtain an access card and other system hardware from

Plaintiff, i.e., a satellite dish. Once Plaintiff activates the access card, the customer can receive and

view in a decrypted format, i.e., unscrambled, those channels to which the customer has subscribed

or arranged to purchase from Plaintiff.

///

///

Case 1:04-cv-06237-OWW -TAG Document 19 Filed 07/01/05 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

47 U.S.C. § 605, et seq., prohibits the unauthorized use of wire or radio communications, including interception

and broadcast of pirated cable or broadcast programming.

2

18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521, prohibits intentional interception of any wire, oral or electronic communication service

in violation of the W iretap Act.

2

On September 10, 2004, Plaintiff filed this action to allege that Lewis Escalante

(“Defendant”) purchased and used one pirate access device and illegally modified Plaintiff’s access

card(s) to access unauthorized viewing of Plaintiff’s television programing. Plaintiff’s complaint

alleges claims for (first) unauthorized reception of satellite signals in violation of the Federal

Communications Act of 1934 (the “Communications Act”), 47 U.S.C. § 605, et seq.,1 (second)

unauthorized interception of electronic communications in violation of the Electronic

Communications Privacy Act (the “Wiretap Act”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521,2 (third) willful assembly

or modification of devices or equipment in violation of § 605 (e)(4) of the Communications Act,

and (fourth) conversion. 

On November 16, 2004, Defendant was personally served with a summons and complaint.

(Court Doc. 11, Exh. B). On December 28, 2004, this Court’s clerk entered default against

Defendant. (Court Doc. 7). Plaintiff seeks a default judgment against Defendant to award

$10,000.00 in statutory damages under its second and third claims, or alternatively, its first claim. 

Plaintiff also seeks an award of $2,894.49 in attorney’s fees and costs under 47 U.S.C. §

605(e)(3)(B)(iii) and 18 U.S.C. § 2520(b)(3) for a total judgment of at least $12,894.49.

On April 22, 2005, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations to grant

Plaintiff a $2,914.49 default judgment against Defendant as follows:

1. $1,000.00 for federal statutory damages under 47 U.S.C. § 605(e)(3)(C)(i)(II).

2. $1,914.49 for costs, including attorney fees.

Total: $2,914.49.

The magistrate judge recommended the Court exercise its discretion to award no damages to Plaintiff

for Defendant’s violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2511. The findings and recommendations granted 15 court

days after their service to file written objections. No objections were filed.

///

Case 1:04-cv-06237-OWW -TAG Document 19 Filed 07/01/05 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

ORDER

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court conducted a de novo review of this case. 

Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the magistrate judge’s findings and

recommendations are supported by the record and the magistrate judge’s analysis.

Accordingly, this Court ORDERS:

1. The magistrate judge’s Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff’s Application for

Default Judgment, filed February 7, 2005 (Court Doc. 9), are adopted in full; and

2. Plaintiff is GRANTED a $2,914.49 default judgment against Defendant as follows:

a. $1,000.00 for federal statutory damages under 47 U.S.C. § 605(e)(3)(C)(i)(II).

b. $1,914.49 for costs, including attorney fees.

Total: $2,914.49.

The clerk of this Court is DIRECTED to enter a $2,914.49 judgment in favor of Plaintiff

DIRECTV, Inc. and against Defendant Lewis Escalante, an individual. The clerk of this Court is

further DIRECTED to close this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 21, 2005 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06237-OWW -TAG Document 19 Filed 07/01/05 Page 3 of 3