Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-00960/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-00960-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 870
Nature of Suit: Tax Suits
Cause of Action: 26:7401 IRS: Tax Liability

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES,

Plaintiff,

v.

BILL H. BROOKE, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:22–cv–960–KJM–KJN

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME

(ECF No. 40.)

Presently pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion for default judgment against 

defendant Bill H. Brooke, which was filed on December 19, 2023 and which was set for hearing 

on January 23, 2024. (ECF No. 36.) Defendant was to file an opposition by January 2, 2024, but 

this deadline passed without any filing. Accordingly, the court vacated the hearing and provided 

defendant until January 30, 2024 to file a written response. (ECF No. 37.) This last order was 

served on defendant by mail. (ECF No. 38.) Despite this, no written response was filed. 

However, the court became aware that Mr. Brooke appeared at the Sacramento courthouse 

on January 23rd and, finding no hearing, inquired with a court employee about the status of the 

case. Given this, and out of an abundance of caution, the court ordered Mr. Brooke to file a 

written response to the default judgment motion within the month. (ECF No. 39.) On February 

26, Mr. Brooke filed a request for more time to oppose, indicating he is attempting to secure 

counsel for this matter. (ECF No. 40.)

Case 2:22-cv-00960-DC-CSK Document 41 Filed 03/01/24 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

Given defendant’s filing, the pending default judgment motion, and this Circuit’s longheld policy that “cases should be decided upon their merits whenever reasonably possible,” Eitel 

v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472 (9th Cir. 1986), defendant is granted an extension of time.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. By April 30, 2024, Mr. Brooke shall cause counsel to enter an appearance in this action. 

Should this occur, new counsel shall immediately confer with the Government’s counsel 

about how this case should proceed;

2. Should Mr. Brooke be unable to retain counsel by April 30th, he shall file a declaration 

with the court indicating what efforts he made to retain counsel;

3. Regardless of whether or not Mr. Brooke retains counsel, an opposition to the motion for 

default judgment, or a statement of non-opposition, is due by May 14, 2024.

Dated: February 29, 2024

broo.960

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:22-cv-00960-DC-CSK Document 41 Filed 03/01/24 Page 2 of 2