Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00509/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00509-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)

---

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

Grisell Alves, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Emerald Correctional Management LLC,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 11-00509-PHX-FJM

ORDER

The court has before it defendant's motion to set aside entry of default (doc. 8),

plaintiff's response (doc. 9), and defendant's reply (doc. 11).

Defendant moves to set aside the entry of default judgment pursuant to Rule 55(c),

Fed. R. Civ. P. Defendant argues that the entry of default is the direct result of plaintiff's

own "bad faith litigation tactics" (doc. 8 at 1). It is undisputed that the parties agreed that

defendant would waive service of process. Defense counsel operated under this assumption.

Plaintiff's counsel, however, apparently changed his mind and decided to serve the complaint

via a process server. Plaintiff's counsel did not inform defense counsel of this change and

defense counsel was unaware that a complaint had been served. When no answer was filed,

plaintiff's counsel simply applied for an entry of default. Plaintiff's counsel argues that this

conduct is irrelevant because defense counsel offers no explanation as to why she didn't

know Emerald Corporation was served and file an Answer. 

Case 2:11-cv-00509-FJM Document 12 Filed 07/15/11 Page 1 of 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

- 2 -

We may set aside an entry of default for good cause shown. Rule 55(c), Fed. R. Civ.

P. We consider: (1) the moving party's culpable conduct; (2) prejudice to the non-moving

party; and (3) the moving party's meritorious defenses. TCI Group Life Ins. of N. Am. v.

Knoebber, 244 F.3d 691, 696 (9th Cir. 2001). Good cause has been shown. Defense counsel

reasonably acted under the assumption that a waiver of service would be sent, rather than

formal service of process. When plaintiff's counsel changed his mind about the method of

service, he should have informed defense counsel, or at least contacted defense counsel

before simply filing an application for default. Defendant did not intentionally fail to answer.

Given the early stage of this litigation, plaintiff will not be prejudiced by setting aside the

default. Defendant also has demonstrated a meritorious defense.

THEREFORE, WE GRANT defendant's motion to set aside entry of default (doc.

8).

DATED this 15th day of July, 2011.

Case 2:11-cv-00509-FJM Document 12 Filed 07/15/11 Page 2 of 2