Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_24-cv-01177/USCOURTS-azd-2_24-cv-01177-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract

---

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

AMMO A-Z, LLC,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Zenith Firearms, Inc.,

Defendant.

No. CV-24-01177-PHX-DGC

ORDER AND DEFAULT JUDGMENT

Plaintiff AMMO A-Z has filed a motion for default judgment against Defendant

Zenith Firearms pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b). Doc. 19. For reasons 

stated below, default judgment is appropriate and will be entered in the amount of 

$268,847.72, plus post-judgment interest.

I. Background.

Plaintiff’s complaint contains the following allegations. In 2023, Plaintiff prepaid 

$349,950 to Defendant for the purchase of ammunition that Defendant never delivered. 

Doc. 1 ¶¶ 2, 15-19. After several missed delivery dates, Plaintiff and Defendant executed 

a Repayment Agreement (Doc. 1-1) on February 27, 2024, in which Defendant admitted 

it owed Plaintiff $349,950 and waived all defenses. Id. ¶¶ 3, 6, 20-21, 25, 27-28, 31. 

Pursuant to the Repayment Agreement’s terms, Defendant agreed to (1) ship one hundred 

rifles at a repayment value of $1,000 per rifle ($100,000 total) to Plaintiff, and (2) repay 

Case 2:24-cv-01177-DGC Document 22 Filed 01/02/25 Page 1 of 4
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

Plaintiff the remaining $249,950 balance by March 31, 2024. Id. ¶¶ 4-5, 26. The 

Repayment Agreement requires payment of applicable interest and reasonable attorneys’

fees and costs in the event of breach. Id. ¶¶ 7, 29, 30.

Defendant shipped the one hundred rifles to Plaintiff and Plaintiff credited 

$100,000 against the amount Defendant owed. Id. ¶¶ 8, 32-33. Defendant has not paid 

the remaining $249,950.00 balance or attempted to cure its breach of the Repayment 

Agreement despite numerous requests from Plaintiff. Id. ¶¶ 9, 34-35.

The complaint asserts claims for breach of contract, account stated, and unjust 

enrichment. Id. ¶¶ 36-54. The complaint requests a judgment against Defendant for 

compensatory damages, plus applicable interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs. Id. ¶ 55.

Defendant was served with process on July 12, 2024 (Doc. 7), but has not filed a 

responsive pleading. Pursuant to Rule 55(a), the Clerk entered Defendant’s default on 

August 28, 2024. Doc. 11. Defendant appeared in this action on October 11, 2024, 

stating that it would not move to set aside the default, but would request a hearing to 

determine the amount of damages to be awarded in a default judgment, including any 

interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs. Doc. 18.

Plaintiff filed its motion for default judgment on November 1, 2024. Doc. 19. 

Defendant has filed a response, to which Plaintiff replied. Docs. 20, 21.

II. Discussion.

A. Default Judgment.

After the Clerk enters default, the Court may enter default judgment pursuant 

to Rule 55(b). While the Court it is not required to make findings of fact, see Fair 

Housing of Marin v. Combs, 285 F.3d 899, 906 (9th Cir. 2002), it should consider several 

factors: (1) the possibility of prejudice to Plaintiff, (2) the merits of the claims, (3) the 

sufficiency of the complaint, (4) the amount of money at stake, (5) the possibility of 

factual disputes, (6) whether default is due to excusable neglect, and (7) the policy 

favoring decisions on the merits, see Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 

1986).

Case 2:24-cv-01177-DGC Document 22 Filed 01/02/25 Page 2 of 4
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

Plaintiff seeks default judgment in the principal amount owed of $249,950, plus 

applicable interest. Doc. 19 at 3-4. Defendant does not oppose default judgment with 

respect liability or the principal amount of $249,950. See Doc. 20. Having considered 

Plaintiff’s motion, the supporting affidavit (Doc. 19-1), and the relevant Eitel factors, the 

Court finds that the requested default judgment is appropriate.

Defendant requests a hearing to determine the amount of pre-judgment interest, 

asserting that Plaintiff does not articulate its methodology in calculating the interest it 

claims is due. Doc. 20 at 7. But Plaintiff has made clear that it seeks pre-judgment 

interest on the principal amount at the rate of 10% per annum pursuant to the terms of the 

Repayment Agreement (Doc. 1-1 ¶ 3) and A.R.S. § 44-1201(A)(2) (interest is at the rate 

of ten percent a year). Docs. 19 at 4, 20 at 4-5.

Applying the 10% per annum rate to the principal amount of $249,950.00, 

pre-judgment interest accrues at a daily rate of $68.47 ($249,950.00 x 0.1 ÷ 365). See 

Doc. 20 at 5. From April 1, 2024, the date of Defendant’s breach of the Repayment 

Agreement, to December 20, 2024, the date of this judgment – a total of 276 days –

prejudgment interest amounts to $18,897.72 ($68.47 x 276). Adding this interest amount 

to the principal amount of $249,950.00 totals $268,847.72. The Court will enter default 

judgment in the amount of $268,847.72 and deny Defendant’s request for a hearing. See 

Ameris Bank v. MTA Transp., LLC, No. 8:24-CV-00877-JLS-MAR, 2024 WL 4720934, 

at *1-4 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 23, 2024) (granting default judgement in a breach of contract case 

where the principal amount owed and pre-judgment interest could be calculated without a 

hearing); Chucho Produce LLC v. Tonys Fresh Produce Inc., No. CV-21-00372-TUCRM, 2022 WL 2304529, at *1-2 (D. Ariz. June 27, 2022) (same).

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a), post-judgment interest is calculated at a rate equal to 

the weekly average 1-year Treasury constant maturity yield for the calendar week 

preceding the date of judgment. See Doc. 21 at 6; Federal Reserve, Selected Interest 

Rates, https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/H15/ (listing daily rates for 1-year 

Treasury constant maturity yields). Defendant asserts that Plaintiff fails to specify 

Case 2:24-cv-01177-DGC Document 22 Filed 01/02/25 Page 3 of 4
4

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

whether post-judgment interest should be calculated based on the principal amount owed 

or the total amount of the judgment. Doc. 20 at 7. This Circuit has made clear that 

“[p]ost-judgment interest should be awarded on the entire amount of the judgment, 

including any pre-judgment interest.” Lagstein v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of 

London, 725 F.3d 1050, 1056 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing Air Separation, Inc. v. Underwriters 

at Lloyd’s of London, 45 F.3d 288, 291 (9th Cir. 1995)).

B. Attorneys’ Fees and Costs.

Plaintiff requests an award of attorneys’ fees in the amount of $14,642.00 and 

costs for filing and service fees totaling $575.00. Doc. 21 at 2-4. But Plaintiff does not 

address all of the factors bearing on the reasonableness of the fee award. See Hensley v. 

Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 429-30 & n.3 (1983); LRCiv 54.2(c)(3). Plaintiff shall have 

until January 17, 2025 to file an appropriate motion for attorneys’ fees and a separate 

bill of costs to be taxed by the Clerk. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d); LRCiv 54.1, 54.2; 

Chucho Produce, 2022 WL 2304529, at *2.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment (Doc. 19) is granted.

2. Default judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiff AMMO A-Z, LLC and

against Defendant Zenith Firearms, Inc. in the amount of $268,847.72.

3. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961, Plaintiff is awarded post-judgment interest 

from the date of judgment until the judgment is satisfied.

4. Plaintiff shall have until January 17, 2025 to file a motion for attorneys’ 

fees and a bill of costs. Defendant shall have until January 31, 2025 to respond, and 

Plaintiff may reply by February 7, 2025.

5. Defendant’s request for a hearing is denied.

Dated this 2nd day of January, 2025.

Case 2:24-cv-01177-DGC Document 22 Filed 01/02/25 Page 4 of 4