Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01090/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01090-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BASANT SIDHU, et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-09-1090 LKK DAD

v.

SHERIFF’S DEPUTY S. GARCIA, et al., ORDER

Defendants.

 /

This matter came before the court on February 19, 2010, for hearing of plaintiffs’

motion for default judgment against defaulted defendant Sundar Bains. The court also

considered defendant Bains’ motion to continue the hearing of the default judgment motion. 

Herman A.D. Franck, V, Esq. appeared on behalf of plaintiffs Basant Sidhu and Sanjesh Singh,

who were also present in court. Frank Epstein, Esq. was present on behalf of defaulted defendant

Sundar Bains and stated his intention to file a notice of appearance and a motion to set aside

entry of default on February 22, 2010.

For the reasons set forth on the record, the court denied plaintiffs’ motion for

default judgment without prejudice to the filing of a renewed and properly supported motion. 

The court also denied defendant Bains’ motion to continue the hearing.

/////

Case 2:09-cv-01090-LKK -DAD Document 31 Filed 02/22/10 Page 1 of 2
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

2

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiffs’ January 14, 2010 motion for default judgment as to defendant

Sundar Bains (Doc. No. 26) is denied without prejudice; and

2. Defendant Sundar Bains’ February 18, 2010 motion to continue the hearing

(Doc. No. 29) is denied.

DATED: February 19, 2010.

DAD:kw

Ddad1\orders.civil\sidhu.oah.021910

Case 2:09-cv-01090-LKK -DAD Document 31 Filed 02/22/10 Page 2 of 2