Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00102/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00102-31/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

GENERAL CHARLES “CHUCK” 

YEAGER, (RET.), and GENERAL 

CHUCK YEAGER FOUNDATION,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CONNIE BOWLIN, et al.,

Defendants.

CIV. NO. 2:08-102 WBS CKD

ORDER

----oo0oo----

Defendants request an award of expenses incurred to 

enforce this court’s award of attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant 

to California’s Enforcement of Judgments Law, Cal. Civ. Proc.

Code §§ 680.010, et seq. (Docket No. 223.) Plaintiff General 

Charles E. Yeager opposes the motion pro se. (Docket No. 228.) 

The court understands defendants’ motion to request 

fees and costs associated solely with the enforcement of the 

court’s June 3, 2010 judgment. (See Defs.’ Mem. at 3.) 

Case 2:08-cv-00102-WBS-CKD Document 230 Filed 06/02/15 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

2

Defendants say that judgment “has been collected in full.” (Id.; 

see also id. at 2 (“Yeager did pay Bowlins the balance of the 

underlying judgment . . . .”).) 

These statements suggest the instant motion may be 

untimely. See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 685.070(b) (“Before the 

judgment is fully satisfied but not later than two years after 

the costs have been incurred, the judgment creditor claiming 

costs under this section shall file a memorandum of costs

. . . .”), 685.080(a) (“The motion shall be made before the 

judgment is satisfied in full, but not later than two years after 

the costs have been incurred.”); see also Carnes v. Zamani, 488 

F.3d 1057, 1059-61 (9th Cir. 2007) (affirming the denial of a 

similar motion as untimely). However, neither party discusses

this issue in their briefing. In order to ensure a thorough

adjudication of this matter involving a pro se party, the court

will continue the hearing set for this motion and invites both

parties to file supplemental briefs addressing the timeliness of 

defendants’ motion. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

(1) The hearing currently scheduled for June 15, 2015, 

is CONTINUED to June 29, 2015, at 2 p.m.;

(2) Defendants shall file a supplemental memorandum 

addressing the timeliness of their motion for 

attorneys’ fees and costs of collection of 

judgment on or before June 8, 2015;

(3) Plaintiffs shall file a supplemental response 

addressing the same issue on or before June 15, 

2015.

Case 2:08-cv-00102-WBS-CKD Document 230 Filed 06/02/15 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

Dated: June 2, 2015

Case 2:08-cv-00102-WBS-CKD Document 230 Filed 06/02/15 Page 3 of 3