Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

AVENDANO v. SECURITY CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC., 3:13-cv-00168-HDM-VPC. (2014)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20140402b56 Visitors: 1
Filed: Apr. 01, 2014
Latest Update: Apr. 01, 2014
Summary: ORDER HOWARD D. McKIBBEN, District Judge. Plaintiffs filed their complaint in this action on April 3, 2013, and defendants United Government Security Officers of America and United Government Security Officers of America, Local 283 ("Union defendants") filed their answer on July 29, 2013. On January 27, 2014, the court granted the motion for more definite statement filed by defendants Security Consultants Group, Inc., Paragon Systems, Inc., and Securities Security Services USA, Inc. and direct
More

ORDER

HOWARD D. McKIBBEN, District Judge.

Plaintiffs filed their complaint in this action on April 3, 2013, and defendants United Government Security Officers of America and United Government Security Officers of America, Local 283 ("Union defendants") filed their answer on July 29, 2013. On January 27, 2014, the court granted the motion for more definite statement filed by defendants Security Consultants Group, Inc., Paragon Systems, Inc., and Securities Security Services USA, Inc. and directed plaintiffs to file an amended complaint on or before February 14, 2014.

On February 14, 2014, plaintiffs filed their first amended complaint. On March 11, 2014, absent any answer to the amended complaint by the Union defendants, plaintiff moved for entry of clerk's default (#63). On March 12, 2014, the Union defendants filed a motion for an extension of time in which to file their answer and for leave to file their answer (#64). The motion has been opposed by plaintiffs (#67). The Union defendants have replied (#70).

Defaults are generally disfavored, and cases "should, whenever possible, be decided on the merits." TCI Group Life Ins. Plan v. Knoebber, 244 F.3d 691, 696 (9th Cir. 2001). Because the Union defendants have appeared in and are actively litigating this action, default is not proper at this time. Accordingly, the plaintiffs' motion for entry of default (#63) is DENIED.

The court further finds good cause to grant the Union defendants leave to file their untimely answer to the amended complaint, particularly given that the Union defendants had already answered the plaintiff's original complaint, and the amended complaint was not filed in response to any motion made by the Union defendants. The Union defendants' motion for an enlargement of time and for leave to file an answer, instanter (#64) is therefore GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer