Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01077/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01077-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 490
Nature of Suit: Cable/ Satellite TV
Cause of Action: 47:553 Unauthorized Reception of Cable Service

---

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 

J & J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

JOSEPH CHRISTOPHER ADAMS, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:13-cv-1077 KJM AC (PS) 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff has moved to strike the Answer of defendant Adams, and to enter a default 

against Adams and defendant Waters Edge. ECF No. 32. Neither defendant has opposed the 

motion, nor filed a statement of non-opposition. The court will accordingly decide the motion on 

the papers and vacate the hearing on the motion. 

I. BACKGROUND 

 Defendant Adams filed his Answer to the plaintiff’s Complaint on September 20, 2013. 

ECF No. 8.1

 After some skirmishing in which plaintiff twice notified the court that the case had 

settled and then withdraw the notifications, the court set a status conference. However, on March 

16, 2015, the court’s order was returned as “undeliverable” to defendant Adams. Defendant 

Adams has failed, since then, to advise the court of his address, although required to do so by 

 

1

 Plaintiff’s request for entry of default against Waters Edge Retreat/Moon River Inn, LLC, was 

regrettably delayed, but has since been entered. See ECF No. 33. 

Case 2:13-cv-01077-KJM-AC Document 34 Filed 07/20/15 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

E.D. Cal. 183(b), bringing this lawsuit to a standstill. 

II. ANALYSIS 

 Defendant’s failure to comply with the court’s Local Rules is “grounds for imposition by 

the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of 

the Court.” Local Rule 110. “Courts have inherent equitable powers to dismiss actions or enter 

default judgments for failure to prosecute, contempt of court, or abusive litigation practices.” 

TeleVideo Systems, Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 916 (9th Cir. 1987). This includes the 

authority to strike the answer and enter a default judgment. See, e.g., Adriana Intern. Corp. v. 

Thoeren, 913 F.2d 1406 (9th Cir. 1990) (affirming district court’s striking answers to counter 

claims and cross claims, and entering default), cert. denied ̧ 498 U.S. 1109 (1991). 

 The Ninth Circuit has identified five factors that a district court must consider before 

dismissing a case or declaring a default. They are: 

(1) the public's interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) 

the court's need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the 

other party; (4) the public policy favoring the disposition of cases 

on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions. 

Adriana, 913 F.2d at 1412. The court has considered and balanced these factors, and determined 

that it would be appropriate to strike the answer and enter a default. Defendant’s rule violation 

has brought this case to a halt, prevented the court from managing the case, and precluded the 

“expeditious resolution” of this case on the merits. Moreover, no lesser sanction appears 

possible, as defendant has simply stopped participating in this lawsuit after he filed his answer 

nearly two years ago. 

III. CONCLUSION 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

 1. The July 22, 2015 hearing on plaintiff’s Motion To Strike is hereby VACATED; 

 2. Plaintiff’s Motion To Strike Adams’s Answer (ECF No. 32), is GRANTED, and 

Adams’s Answer (ECF No. 8) is hereby STRICKEN; 

 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to ENTER A DEFAULT against defendant Adams; 

and 

Case 2:13-cv-01077-KJM-AC Document 34 Filed 07/20/15 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

 4. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order to move for default 

judgments. Failure of plaintiff to do, or to take other appropriate action, will result in a 

recommendation that this case be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Because of plaintiff’s history 

of filing notices of settlement in this case that have not resulted in disposal of the case, neither 

party shall file a notice of settlement unless it is accompanied by fully executed documents finally 

disposing of the case. 

DATED: July 17, 2015 

Case 2:13-cv-01077-KJM-AC Document 34 Filed 07/20/15 Page 3 of 3