Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_19-cv-01290/USCOURTS-azd-2_19-cv-01290-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1114 Trademark Infringement

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Ugly Pools USA Incorporated,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Kevin Brogan, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CV-19-01290-PHX-ESW

REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION

TO THE HONORABLE SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHEN M. 

McNAMEE:

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 24). On 

April 26, 2019, Plaintiff filed its Amended Complaint (Doc. 11), seeking injunctive relief 

and damages. All Defendants were properly served pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. (Docs. 

16, 17, 18, 19). Defendants failed to file any responsive pleading. Plaintiff filed an 

Application for Entry of Default Judgment with a proper supportive Affidavit (Doc. 20). 

On June 6, 2019, the Clerk’s Entry of Default was filed (Doc. 21).

The Magistrate Judge has considered Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 

24) and all authorities cited therein. No response has been filed. LRCiv. 7.2(i) (failure to 

timely respond may be deemed consent to the motion). The relief sought by Plaintiff is 

fully supported by the record. Plaintiff has met its burden of proof. See NewGen, LLC v. 

Safe Cig, LLC, 840 F.3d 606, 616 (9th Cir. 2016); 15 U.S.C. § 1116 (a); La Quinta 

Worldwide LLC v. P.R.T.M., S.A. de C.V., 762 F.3d 867, 879 (9th Cir. 2014). For good 

Case 2:19-cv-01290-ESW Document 25 Filed 11/07/19 Page 1 of 2
- 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

cause shown,

IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Court grant Plaintiff’s Motion for Default 

Judgment (Doc. 24).

IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Court enter an order permanently 

enjoining the Defendants from using “We Fix Ugly Pools,” “We Fix Ugly Houses” or any 

variation or combination of “We Fix Ugly” as a corporate name, company name, trade 

name, trademark, or service mark.

This Report and Recommendation is not an order that is immediately appealable to 

the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Any notice of appeal pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 

4(a)(1) should not be filed until entry of the District Court’s judgment. The parties shall 

have fourteen days from the date of service of a copy of this Report and Recommendation 

within which to file specific written objections with the Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72. Thereafter, the parties have fourteen days within which to file a 

response to the objections. Failure to file timely objections to the Magistrate Judge’s 

Report and Recommendation may result in the acceptance of the Report and 

Recommendation by the District Court without further review. Failure to file timely 

objections to any factual determinations of the Magistrate Judge may be considered a 

waiver of a party’s right to appellate review of the findings of fact in an order or judgment 

entered pursuant to the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. See United States v. ReynaTapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003); Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1146-47 

(9th Cir. 2007).

Dated this 7th day of November, 2019.

Honorable Eileen S. Willett

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 2:19-cv-01290-ESW Document 25 Filed 11/07/19 Page 2 of 2