Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-01923/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-01923-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection 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 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Marion Gwinn, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Safeguard Recovery LLC, Eckity Capital 

Markets, LLC, 

Defendants. 

No. CV14-1923 PHX DGC

ORDER 

 This case is a civil action brought under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act 

(“FDCPA”). Doc. 1 (citing 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.). Plaintiff filed the complaint on 

August 29, 2014. Id. Defendants have not answered or otherwise responded to the 

complaint. On October 6, 2014, the Clerk entered default as to Defendants. Doc. 10. 

Plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment on March 13, 2015. Doc. 13. No response 

to the motion has been filed. The Court finds Plaintiff’s motion has merit, but further 

evidence is required on the issue of damages. 

Once a party’s default has been entered, the district court has discretion to grant 

default judgment against that party. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2); Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 

F.2d 1089, 1092 (9th Cir. 1980). Factors the court may consider in deciding whether to 

grant default judgment include (1) the possibility of prejudice to the plaintiff, (2) the 

merits of the claim, (3) the sufficiency of the complaint, (4) the amount of money at 

stake, (5) the possibility of a dispute concerning material facts, (6) whether default was 

Case 2:14-cv-01923-DGC Document 14 Filed 05/01/15 Page 1 of 3
- 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 

27 

28 

due to excusable neglect, and (7) the policy favoring a decision on the merits. See Eitel 

v.McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 1986). 

 The Court finds that these factors most likely weigh in favor of a default 

judgment, but that further evidence is needed on the issue of damages. “The general rule 

of law is that upon default the factual allegations of the complaint, except those relating 

to the amount of damages, will be taken as true.” Geddes v. United Fin. Grp., 559 F.2d 

557, 560 (9th Cir. 1977). For Plaintiff’s claims, his allegations are taken as true. But for 

his damages, more evidence is necessary. “In determining damages, a court can rely on 

the declarations submitted by the plaintiff or order a full evidentiary hearing.” Philip 

Morris USA, Inc. v. Castworld Products, Inc., 219 F.R.D. 494, 498 (C.D. Cal. 2003). “A 

default judgment may be entered without a hearing on damages when the amount claimed 

is capable of ascertainment from definite figures contained in the documentary evidence 

or in detailed affidavits.” Taylor Made Golf Co. v. Carsten Sports, Ltd., 175 F.R.D. 658, 

661 (S.D. Cal. 1997). 

 Plaintiff claims under the FDCPA actual damages of $500 and statutory damages 

of $1,000. See 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a). Plaintiff does not explain the basis of his actual 

damages, and the Court will therefore require Plaintiff to submit an affidavit that so 

explains. Statutory damages of no more than $1,000 may be awarded under the FDCPA 

and do not require a finding of actual damages. Id. § 1692k(a)(2)(A). In assessing the 

appropriate amount of statutory damages, the Court must consider “the frequency and 

persistence of noncompliance by the debt collector, the nature of such noncompliance, 

and the extent to which such noncompliance was intentional.” Id. § 1692k(b)(1). The 

Court finds that an affidavit from Plaintiff or Plaintiff’s attorney addressing these factors 

is necessary. 

 Plaintiff also requests attorney’s fees. Under the FDCPA, a successful plaintiff is 

entitled to collect “the costs of the action, together with a reasonable attorney's fee as 

determined by the court.” Id. § 1692k(a)(3). Plaintiff’s attorney may submit, along with 

the other affidavits, a listing of the costs of the action and his attorney’s fees. Plaintiff’s 

Case 2:14-cv-01923-DGC Document 14 Filed 05/01/15 Page 2 of 3
- 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 

attorney must also explain why the requested attorney’s fees are reasonable. 

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s attorney shall submit affidavits 

addressing: (1) The basis for Plaintiff’s actual damages; (2) the factors for awarding 

statutory damages under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(b)(1); and (3) the costs of this action, 

Plaintiff’s attorney’s fees, and an explanation of why the attorney’s fees are reasonable 

on or before May 15. 2015. 

 Dated this 1st day of May, 2015. 

Case 2:14-cv-01923-DGC Document 14 Filed 05/01/15 Page 3 of 3