Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05810/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05810-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Benefits

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ELECTRICAL INDUSTRY SERVICE 

BUREAU, INC., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

BEING OF SERVICE INC, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-05810-WHO 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' 

REQUEST TO CONVERT THIS CASE

TO DEFAULT AND ENTERING 

DEFAULT AGAINST DEFENDANTS 

BEING OF SERVICE, INC. AND 

ADVANCED ELECTRIC SOLUTIONS, 

INC.

Re: Dkt. Nos. 38, 40, 41, 42

Counsel for defendants moved to withdraw on May 28, 2015 because defendants instructed 

them to cease work and move to withdraw, despite counsel’s advice that corporations must be 

represented by an attorney in order to litigate in court. Dkt. No. 32, p.2. I granted the motion on 

June 8, 2015, stayed the case until August 1, 2015 to allow defendants to obtain new counsel, and 

set a Case Management Conference for August 11, 2015. Dkt. No. 38. I reiterated in my Order 

that the defendants, as corporations, could only defend this litigation if they were represented by 

counsel. On July 31, 2015, I received a letter from the CEO of Being of Service, Dan Carlos,

indicating that defendants would not be obtaining counsel and recognizing that their failure to do 

so would mean that they could not participate in this litigation and that a default would likely be 

entered. Dkt. No. 40. Plaintiffs moved for entry of default on August 4, 2015. Dkt. No. 41. 

Plaintiffs appeared for the Case Management Conference on August 11, 2015. There was no 

appearance on behalf of defendants. 

In light of these facts, I GRANT plaintiff’s motion and ENTER default against the 

defendants for their failure to “otherwise defend” this case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 

Case 3:13-cv-05810-WHO Document 45 Filed 08/13/15 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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Procedure 55(a). Plaintiffs shall either apply for a default judgment or request a further Case 

Management Conference within 60 days of the date of this Order to explain why additional time is 

needed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 13, 2015

______________________________________

WILLIAM H. ORRICK

United States District Judge

Case 3:13-cv-05810-WHO Document 45 Filed 08/13/15 Page 2 of 2