Sylvester, Ruud, Petrie & Cruzen, a Washington Partnership,plaintiffs-appellees, v. Colin Halpern; Nps Shareholders Investment Corp.; Npscorp.; Nps Technologies Group, Inc.,; Nuclearpower Services, Inc.; Nps Industries,inc., Defendants-appellants, 967 F.2d 591 (9th Cir. 1992)

MEMORANDUM^* 

We affirm, for the reasons stated by the District Judge. That process was not properly served by mail is immaterial, because the defendants waived service. The district court's findings of fact are reviewed for clear error, Meadows v. Dominican Republic, 817 F.2d 1247, 1256 (9th Cir. 1987), and we see none in the finding of waiver. Nor did the district court err in determining that the defendants were not entitled to notice under Rule 55(b) (2) because they had not appeared in the action within the meaning of that provision. The defendants had not appeared, nor had they made informal contacts showing a clear purpose to defend the suit. Under the liberal pleading standards of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, the averments of the complaint sufficiently established a basis for judgment against all the defendants, including Halpern. Danning v. Lavine, 572 F.2d 1386, 1388-89 (9th Cir. 1978).

AFFIRMED.