Valley National Bank v. Road Liner LLC, No. 1:2021cv01155 - Document 14 (E.D. Cal. 2021)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL the 13 Findings and Recommendations Granting 11 Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 11/30/2021. CASE CLOSED. (Rivera, O)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VALLEY NATIONAL BANK, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. ROAD LINER LLC, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:21-cv-1155 - AWI - JLT ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT (Docs. 11, 13) 16 17 Valley National Bank assert that Road Liner LLC breached a contract related to the financing of 18 premiums charged by an insurance company. (Doc. 1.) Because Road Liner LLC failed to respond to 19 the allegations in the complaint, Plaintiff requested default judgment pursuant to Rule 55 of the Federal 20 Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. 11.) 21 The magistrate judge determined the factors set forth by the Ninth Circuit in Eitel v. McCool, 22 782 F.2d 1470 (9th Cir. 1986) weighed in favor of the entry of default judgment. (Doc. 13 at 5-7.) 23 Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended the motion for default judgment be granted. In addition, 24 the magistrate judge recommended judgement be entered in favor of Plaintiff Valley National Bank and 25 against Defendant Road Liner LLC in the amount of $90,013.50. (Id. at 8.) 26 The parties were granted fourteen days from the date of service to file any objections to the 27 recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. (Doc. 13 at 8.) In addition, the parties were “advised that 28 failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s 1 1 order.” (Id., citing Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991); Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 2 834, 834 (9th Cir. 2014)). Thus, any objections were to be filed no later than November 23, 2021. To 3 date, no objections have been filed. 4 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi Valley United 5 School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), this Court conducted a de novo review of the case. 6 Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations are 7 supported by the record and proper analysis. 8 Based upon the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 9 1. The Findings and Recommendations dated November 9, 2021 (Doc. 13) are ADOPTED IN FULL; 10 11 2. Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment (Doc. 11) is GRANTED; 12 3. Judgement SHALL be entered in favor of Plaintiff Valley National Bank and against Defendant Road Liner LLC in the amount of $90,013.50; and 13 14 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this action. 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 Dated: November 30, 2021 18 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.