Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_17-cv-06474/USCOURTS-cand-4_17-cv-06474-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:185 Employee Pension Plan

---

1 PAUL V. SIMPSON, BAR NO. 83878 

psimpson@sgiilaw.com 

2 SEAN R. BRODERICK, BAR NO. 263942 

sbroderick@sgiilaw.com 

3 SIMPSON, GARRITY, INNES & JACUZZI 

Professional Corporation 

4 601 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 950 

South San Francisco, California 94080 

5 Telephone: (650) 615-4860 

Fax: (650) 615-4861 

6 

Attorneys for Defendant 

7 Juan Manuel Loza dba Loza & Sons Construction 

8 

9 

10 

11 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

(OAKLAND)

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE 

12 LABORERS HEALTH AND WELFARE 

TRUST FUND FOR NORTHERN 

) Case No. 4:17-cv-06474-HSG 

) 

13 CALIFORNIA; BOARD OF TRUSTEES 

OF THE LABORERS PENSION TRUST 

14 FUND FOR NORTHERN CALIFORNIA; 

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE 

15 LABORERS VACATION-HOLIDAY 

TRUT FUND FOR NORTHERN 

16 CALIFORNIA; and BOARD OF 

TRUSTEES OF THE LABORERS 

17 TRAINING AND RETRAINING TRUST 

FUND FOR NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, 

18 

19 

20 

V. 

Plaintiffs, 

JUAN MANUEL LOZA, an individual doing 

21 business as LOZA & SONS 

CONSTRUCTION, 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

22 ) 

Defendant. ) 

2311--------------- )

24 

25 I I I 

26 I I I 

27 I I I 

28 / / / 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET 

ASIDE THE NOTICE OF ENTRY OF 

DEFAULT 

Assigned for All Purposes to 

District Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.

Courtroom 2 - 4

th Floor 

Complaint filed: 

FAC filed: 

November 7, 2017 

January 13, 2020 

{32673-1 00496522.DOCX I } 

4: 17-cv-06474-HSG STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET ASIDE THE NOTICE OF ENTRY OF DEFAULT 

• I •

Case 4:17-cv-06474-HSG Document 65 Filed 02/05/20 Page 1 of 6
1 

The parties hereby request that this Court set aside the Notice of Default entered January 

30, 2018, based on the following grounds: 

3 Plaintiffs filed their original Complaint on November 7, 2017, against Defendant Juan 

4 Manual Loza, an individual doing business as Loza & Sons Construction ("Loza" and/or 

5 "Defendant") alleging claims for breach of a collective bargaining agreement (to recover unpaid 

6 trust fund contributions) and for mandatory injunctive relief. 

7 During all relevant times prior to Plaintiffs filing their First Amended Complaint ("F AC") 

8 on January 13, 2020, Defendant Loza was an unrepresented party in propria persona. Plaintiffs 

9 submitted a Request for Entry of Default against Defendant to this Court and default was entered 

10 against Loza on January 30, 2018. Plaintiffs personally served their FAC on January 17, 2020, on 

11 

12 

Defendant. 

Defendant just retained the undersigned counsel, SIMPSON, GARRITY, INNES & 

13 JACUZZI and defense counsel only recently learned of the entry of default, and therefore began to 

14 take diligent steps in order to remedy the default. 

15 A. Legal Standard For Setting Aside Default. 

16 The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for determining when a default should be set aside 

17 are more solicitous towards a movant, especially in cases where the actions leading to the default 

18 were taken without the benefit of legal representation. United States v. Mesle (9th Cir 2010) 615 

19 F.3d 1085, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 16120, *1-2 [setting aside default against pro per defendant

20 and finding that a layperson working without the aid of an attorney should not be held to the same 

21 standards to which courts hold sophisticated parties acting with the benefit of legal 

22 representation]; see also, TC! Group Life Ins. Plan v. Knoebber (9th Cir 2001) 244 F.3d 691, 695-

23 98.

24 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(c) provides that an entry of default may be set aside 

25 upon a showing of good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(c). The Ninth Circuit's good cause standard for 

26 setting aside entry of default is the same as that for setting aside default judgment under Rule

27 60(b ), but the test for setting aside entry of default is less rigid and is more generous to the party

28 

{32673-1 00496522.DOCX - 2 - I } 

4:17-cv-06474-HSG STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET ASIDE THE NOTICE OF ENTRY OF DEFAULT 

Case 4:17-cv-06474-HSG Document 65 Filed 02/05/20 Page 2 of 6
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

in default. Franchise Holding II, LLC v. Huntington Rests. Group, Inc. (9th Cir. 2004) 375 F.3d 

922, 925. 

The Ninth Circuit considers three factors when deciding whether to set aside default: (1) 

whether the defendant's culpable conduct led to the default; (2) whether the defendant has a 

meritorious defense; and (3) whether setting aside default would prejudice the plaintiff. Franchise 

Holding II, LLC v. Huntington Rests. Group, Inc., supra, 375 F.3d at 925-26. In addition, "[t]he 

7 law does not favor defaults," and "therefore, any doubts as to whether a party is in default should 

8 be decided in favor of the defaulting party." Bonita Packing Co. v. O'Sullivan (C.D. Cal. 1995) 

9 165 F.R.D. 610, 614. 

10 B. Defendant's Delay in Responding to the Lawsuit was Not Culpable.

11 In the Ninth Circuit, analysis of "culpability" for the purposes of demonstrating "good

12 cause" under Rule 55(c) overlaps with the standard for "excusable neglect" under Rule 60(b)(l). 

13 TCI Group Life Ins. Plan v. Knoebber (9th Cir. 2001) 244 F .3d 691, 696 [ questioned on other 

14 grounds]; Meadows v. Dominican Republic (9th Cir.1987) 817 F.2d 517, 522. In analyzing 

15 culpability, the court may consider a defendant's exigent personal matters, his mental state, and 

16 his lack of familiarity with legal matters. Knoebber, supra, 244 F.3d 691at 699 [finding 

17 defendant's delay in response not culpable because she was grieving the death of her husband and 

18 was not familiar with the legal system]. 

19 Here, at the time of service Defendant (in pro per) believed in good faith that he was not 

20 bound to the Laborers' Master Agreement for Northern California (the "Master Agreement"), and 

21 therefore Defendant thought (mistakenly) that was he was not required to respond to Plaintiffs' 

22 original Complaint. In addition, Defendant's first language is Spanish and his fluency in English 

23 is limited, which further hampered his ability to understand his obligations about responding to 

24 Plaintiffs' original Complaint. In fact, Defendant only began to appreciate the seriousness of 

25 needing to respond to the instant action after this Court issued ( on September 4, 2019) a bench 

26 warrant - based on Defendant's failure to comply with Plaintiffs' request for a mandatory

27 injunction demanding an audit - which resulted in Loza's arrest. Thereafter and upon Defendant's

28 release, Loza agreed to comply with Plaintiffs' demand for an audit concerning Defendant's trust

{32673-1 00496522.DOCX I } - 3 -

4:17-cv-06474-HSG STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET ASJDE THE NOTICE OF ENTRY OF DEFAULT 

Case 4:17-cv-06474-HSG Document 65 Filed 02/05/20 Page 3 of 6
1 

fund contributions. On or about November 18, 2019, Plaintiffs conducted their audit concerning 

2 

Loza's alleged unpaid fringe benefit trust fund contributions. Based on this audit, Plaintiffs 

amended their original Complaint setting forth their purported monetary damages. 3 

4 After Plaintiffs served their F AC on January 17, 2020, Loza immediately began seeking 

5 representation. The conduct of Loza does not equate to a bad faith or intentional act to delay

6 prosecution of the case. This Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Set Aside the Notice of Entry of 

7 Default is being filed within one week of recently retained defense counsel learning that a default

8 was entered, thereby showing that defense counsel has been diligent in addressing the problem.

9 Furthermore, the original Complaint did not seek monetary damages since the audit had not yet 

1 O been conducted. Defendant has not had an opportunity to address plaintiffs Amended Complaint 

11 for monetary damages. 

Defendant Has a Meritorious Defense to the Lawsuit. 12 c. 

13 A defense is considered meritorious if "there is some possibility that the outcome of the 

14 suit after a full trial will be contrary to the result achieved by the default." Hawaii Carpenters'

15 Trust Funds v. Stone (9th Cir. 1986) 794 F .2d 508, 513. All that is required is an assertion of "a 

16 factual or legal basis that is sufficient to raise a particular defense; the question of whether a 

17 particular factual allegation is true if resolved at a later stage." Audio Toys, Inc. v. Smart AV Pty

18 Ltd., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44078, *8 (N.D. Cal. June 6, 2007). 

19 In order to prevail in the instant action, Plaintiffs must establish that all of the work that 

20 Defendant provided during the Audit Period (defined in the FAC as August 2012, December 2013, 

21 December 2014, March-June and December 2015, January-December 2016, January22 December 2017, and January -March 2018) was covered under the Master Agreement. 

23 Defendant has colorable defenses to Plaintiffs' F AC, including the fact that the majority of work 

24 he performed during the Audit Period was residential landscaping work and, therefore, arguably 

25 not covered under the Master Agreement, which would relieve Defendant from having had to 

26 make certain trust fund contributions to Plaintiffs. 

27 I I I 

28 / / / 

{32673-1 00496522.DOCX I } 

4:17-cv-06474-HSG STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET ASIDE THE NOTICE OF ENTRY OF DEFAULT 

-4-

Case 4:17-cv-06474-HSG Document 65 Filed 02/05/20 Page 4 of 6
1 

2 

D. Plaintiff Will Not Suffer Prejudice If Entry of Default Is Set Aside.

Prejudice is determined by whether a party will be hindered in pursuing its claim.

Knoebber, supra, 244 F.3d at 701. The fact that a party may be denied a quick victory is not 

sufficient to deny relief from default judgment. (Bateman v. United States Postal Service (9th Cir. 

5 2000) 231 F.3d 1220, 1225. "The delay must result in tangible harm such as loss of evidence, 

6 increased difficulties of discovery, or greater opportunity for fraud or collusion." Audio Toys, 

7 

supra, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS at *9. 

8 This case remains pending and nothing determinative has occurred in this case that setting 

9 aside the default will upset. Plaintiffs claim for monetary damages was not encompassed by the 

1 O original Complaint for audit entry. Defendant must be afforded the opportunity to dispute the 

11 claim for damages asserted for the first time in the Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs have agreed to 

12 set aside the Notice of Entry Default. As no prejudice will result to Plaintiffs setting aside the 

13 default the third and final good cause factor is satisfied. 

14 E. StipuJation of tbe Parties 

15 The parties, through their respective attorneys of record, HEREBY STIPULATE AND 

16 AGREE that the default entered against Defendant Juan Manuel Loza, an individual doing 

17 business as Loza & Sons Construction, in this action on January 30, 2018 should be VACATED. 

18 It is further stipulated between Plaintiffs, represented by Ronald L. Richman, Esq. and 

19 Sarah Bowen, Esq., Bullivant Houser Bailey PC and Defendant, Juan Manuel Loza, an individual 

20 doing business as Loza & Sons Construction, represented by Paul V. Simpson, Esq. and Sean R. 

21 Broderick, Esq., that Plaintiffs' Request for Clerk's Entry of Default, be set aside and Defendant 

22 be allowed to file a responsive pleading. The parties stipulate that Defendant shall have ten (10) 

23 I II

24 II I

25 II I 

26 Ill 

27 II I 

28 I I I 

{32673-1 00496522.DOCX I ) - 5 -

4:l 7-cv-06474-HSG STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET ASIDE THE NOTICE OF ENTRY OF DEFAULT 

Case 4:17-cv-06474-HSG Document 65 Filed 02/05/20 Page 5 of 6
1 days to file an answer to the F AC after the Court enters an Order to set aside the Notice of Entry 

2 of Default against Defendant. 

3 

4 Date: January 29, 2020 SIMPSON, GARRITY, INNES & JACUZZI 

Professional Corporation' 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

By: Isl Paul V Simpson 

PAUL V. SIMPSON 

SEAN R. BRODERICK 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Juan Manuel Loza dba Loza & Sons 

Construction 

Plaintiff consents to an order setting aside the Notice of Entry of Default. 

Date: January 29, 2020 BULLIVANT HOUSER BAILEY PC 

By: Isl Ronald L. Richman 

RONALD L. RICHMAN 

SARAH BOWEN 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Board of Trustees of the Laborers Health and 

Welfare Trust Fund for Northern California; 

Board of Trustees of the Laborers Pension Trust 

Fund for Northern California; Board of Trustees 

of the Laborers Vacation-Holiday Trust Fund 

for Northern California; and Board of Trustees 

of the Laborers Training and Retraining Trust 

Fund for Northern California 

ORDER 

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, and based on the Stipulation between the parties, the 

default entered against Defendant Juan Manuel Loza, an individual doing business as Loza & Sons 

Construction is hereby set aside and VACATED. Defendant shall have (10) days to file and serve 

an Answer to the First Amended Complaint. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. 

United States District Judge 

{32673-1 00496522.DOCX I ) 

4: l 7-cv-06474-HSG STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET ASIDE THE NOTICE OF ENTRY OF DEFAULT 

- 6 -

DATED: 2/5/2020

Case 4:17-cv-06474-HSG Document 65 Filed 02/05/20 Page 6 of 6