Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00637/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00637-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 423
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Withdrawal 28 USC 157
Cause of Action: 28:0157 Motion for Withdrawal of Reference

---

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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. CIV S-06-0637-DFL-CMK

Plaintiff, 

vs. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

TREVOR DEAN ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion for entry of default judgment (Doc.

15), filed on December 7, 2006. 

The defendants to this action – Trevor Dean Adams and Shannon Doreen Adams,

husband and wife – are plaintiffs in Adams v. United States, No. CIV S-04-0979-DFL-CMK, in

which defendants allege, among other things, that the United States did not maintain accurate

files concerning their farm loans. Defendants are also debtors in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy

proceeding. In the context of defendants’ civil action, plaintiff herein filed a counterclaim

alleging default on the loans. Plaintiff herein also filed an adversary proceeding in the context of

the bankruptcy case, also alleging default on the loans and seeking an order denying defendants a

discharge on the loan indebtedness. On August 21, 2006, this court withdrew the reference to

Case 2:06-cv-00637-JAM -CMK Document 19 Filed 01/11/07 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

2

the bankruptcy court of plaintiff’s adversary proceeding, which now proceeds separately as this

action, and which has been related to Adams v. United States, No. CIV S-04-0979-DFL-CMK.

On September 15, 2006, the parties filed a joint status report. That document was

signed by Ana Maria Martel, Esq., on behalf of plaintiff, and by Dennis K. Cowen, Esq., on

behalf of defendants. In the joint status report, the parties stipulated that plaintiff would file an

amended complaint by October 1, 2006, and that defendants would file an answer by November

1, 2006. Plaintiff filed the amended complaint on September 18, 2006. As of December 1,

2006, defendants had not filed an answer or otherwise entered a general appearance in the action

and, on the same day, the Clerk of the Court entered defendants’ default pursuant to plaintiff’s

application. Both plaintiff’s request for entry of default and the Clerk’s entry of default were

served on counsel for defendants, as well as John W. Reger, the trustee in defendants’

bankruptcy case. To date, defendants have not responded to plaintiff’s motion or otherwise

appeared in the action. 

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b), default judgment may be entered by

the Clerk of the Court where the defendants have been defaulted for failure to appear and where

plaintiff’s claim is for an amount certain. In all other cases, default judgment may only be

entered upon application to a judge of the court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2). In this case,

plaintiff states that default was entered based on defendants’ failure to appear. Plaintiff also

seeks an amount certain or which can by calculation be made certain. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

55(b)(1). In particular, the amount owed by defendants on the disputed loans, including accrued

interest, can be calculated with certainty, as can contractual attorneys’ fees and costs. However,

plaintiff also seeks by way of default judgment an order denying defendants a discharge of the

loan indebtedness in the context of their bankruptcy case. Because plaintiff seeks more than

simply a judgment on the amount of the loan indebtedness, along with fees and costs, the court

finds that plaintiff’s request for default judgment is proper under Rule 55(b)(2), which requires

application to the court. 

Case 2:06-cv-00637-JAM -CMK Document 19 Filed 01/11/07 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

3

Having considered plaintiff’s motion and supporting declaration, and in light of

the procedural history outlined above, the court finds that entry of default judgment against

defendants is appropriate. Accordingly, the undersigned recommends that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default judgment be granted; 

2. Plaintiff be required to submit a declaration as to the total amount owed by

defendants on all loans referenced in the amended complaint, such amount to include any and all

interest accrued through the date of filing of the declaration; 

3. Plaintiff also be required to submit a declaration as to the total amount of

contractual attorneys’ fees sought, as well as a bill of costs; and

4. Plaintiff be required to submit a proposed judgment setting forth:

a. The amount owed on the loans, plus interest;

b. The amount requested in fees and costs; and

c. The non-dischargability in defendants’ bankruptcy case of

the loan indebtedness

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 20 days

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's

Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive

the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: January 10, 2007.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00637-JAM -CMK Document 19 Filed 01/11/07 Page 3 of 3