Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05875/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05875-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 470
Nature of Suit: Civil (Rico)
Cause of Action: 18:1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JESUS ALBIZU, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

)

v. )

)

CLYDE A. STROHL, et al., ) 

 )

Defendants. )

)

 

1:02-cv-5875-AWI-SMS 

ORDER RE: FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS TO GRANT DEFAULT

JUDGMENT (DOC. 141)

ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK TO

ENTER JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFF AND

AGAINST DEFENDANTS WESLEY

AMUNDSON AND AMUNDSON AND

ASSOCIATES 

Plaintiff is proceeding with counsel with a civil action.

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s application for default

judgment against Defendants Wesley E. Amundson and Amundson and

Associates. The matter has been referred to the Magistrate Judge

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72-302(c)(19).

On November 14, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed findings

and a recommendation that Plaintiff’s application for default

judgment be granted. The findings and recommendation were served

on all parties on November 14, 2005 and contained notice that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed

within thirty (30) days of the date of service of the order. 

Case 1:02-cv-05875-AWI -SMS Document 145 Filed 12/27/05 Page 1 of 3
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

Defendants filed on December7, 2005, a document entitled

“NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO REQUEST AN APPEAL TO THE FINDINGS

AND RECOMMENDATIONS RE: WESLEY E. AMUNDSON AND AMUNDSON AND

ASSOCIATES DATED NOVEMBER 10, 2005.” Defendants did not file any

objections or other documents in response to the findings and

recommendations. 

The docket reflects that Defendants filed what purported to

be a notice of appeal from the findings and recommendations.

Although the filing of a notice of appeal generally divests a

district court of jurisdiction to determine the “substantial

rights” at issue in an action during the pendency of the appeal,

Pyrodyne Corp. v. Pyrotronics Corp., 847 F. 2d 1398, 1403 (9th

Cir. 1988), an exception to this rule exists where a deficiency

in the notice of appeal “is clear to the district court,” Ruby v.

Secretary of the United States Navy, 365 F. 2d 385, 389 (9th Cir.

1966). In such a case the district court may proceed with the

case “knowing that it has not been deprived of jurisdiction.” 

Id. Because it is completely “clear to the district court” that

no appeal lies from a Magistrate Judge’s Findings and

Recommendations, this Court knows “that it has not been deprived

of jurisdiction” over this action. Therefore this action shall

proceed in spite of the filing of a purported notice of appeal

from the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of the case.

Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including the

objections, the Court finds that the findings and recommendation

are supported by the record and proper analysis.

Case 1:02-cv-05875-AWI -SMS Document 145 Filed 12/27/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendation filed November 14, 2005,

are ADOPTED IN FULL, except for a very minor correction in the

calculation of the amount of damages; and

2. Plaintiff’s application for default judgment by the Court

IS GRANTED; and

3. The Court FINDS that there is no just reason for delay; 

and

4. The Clerk IS DIRECTED to enter final judgment in favor of

Plaintiff Jesus Albizu against Defendants Wesley E. Amundson and

Amundson and Associates for $157,800.00 in damages; prejudgment

interest at the rate of ten per cent per annum from May 13, 2002;

punitive damages in the sum of $306,000.00; and treble damages in

the amount of $306,000.00; and

5. The judgment entered by the Clerk SHALL BE CONSIDERED a

final judgment within the meaning of Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 23, 2005 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:02-cv-05875-AWI -SMS Document 145 Filed 12/27/05 Page 3 of 3