Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Hakkasan LV, LLC v. Wang

United States District Court, D. Nevada

March 17, 2015

HAKKASAN LV, LLC; HAKKASAN LIMITED, Plaintiffs,
v.
TSANG HANG WANG; PRIME NIGHTLIFE, LLC, Defendants.

ORDER

GLORIA M. NAVARRO, Chief District Judge.

Pending before the Court is pro se Defendant Tsang Hang Wang's Motion to Set Aside Clerk's Entry of Default. (ECF No. 44). Plaintiffs Hakkasan LV, LLC and Hakkasan Limited filed a Response, (ECF No. 51), to which Defendant Wang replied, (ECF No. 54).

Also before the Court is Defendant Wang's Motion to Dismiss, (ECF No. 43). Plaintiffs filed a Response, (ECF No. 52), to which Defendant Wang replied, (ECF No. 53). For the reasons set forth below, the Court will deny these Motions.

I. BACKGROUND

This case centers upon allegations that Defendants Wang and Prime Nightlife, LLC infringed upon the trademarks of Plaintiffs Hakkasan LV, LLC and Hakkasan Limited by registering and operating the web site. (Am. Compl., ECF No. 10). On July 10, 2013, the Court granted Plaintiffs' request to permit service of the Summons and Complaint upon Defendant Wang via email. (Order 4:25-5:2, ECF No. 12). On May 16, 2014, the Court entered default judgment against Defendants. (ECF No. 28). On January 28, 2015, Magistrate Judge Carl Hoffman denied a motion in which Defendant Wang requested that service of process be quashed. (ECF No. 58). In the instant Motions, Defendant Wang requests that the Court set aside the default judgment and dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint.[1]

II. LEGAL STANDARD

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(c), "The court may set aside an entry of default for good cause...." To determine if good cause exists, the Court considers:

(1) whether the party seeking to set aside the default engaged in culpable conduct that led to the default; (2) whether it had no meritorious defense; or (3) whether reopening the default judgment would prejudice the other party. This standard... is disjunctive, such that a finding that any one of these factors is true is sufficient reason for the district court to refuse to set aside the default.

United States v. Signed Personal Check No. 730 of Yubran S. Mesle, 615 F.3d 1085, 1091 (9th Cir. 2010) (internal citations and quotations omitted). "[J]udgment by default is a drastic step appropriate only in extreme circumstances; a case should, whenever possible, be decided on the merits." Id.

III. DISCUSSION

Defendant Wang argues that he had several meritorious defenses to Plaintiffs' claims, that setting aside the default judgment would not prejudice Plaintiffs, and that he was not culpable for the conduct that led to the entry of default judgment. However, as the Court finds that Defendant Wang has failed to demonstrate that he could assert any meritorious defenses, it need not consider the other arguments put forward by Defendant Wang.

"A defendant seeking to vacate a default judgment must present specific facts that would constitute a defense." Signed Pers. Check No. 730, 615 F.3d at 1094. However, "All that is necessary to satisfy the meritorious defense requirement is to allege sufficient facts that, if true, would constitute a defense." Id.

Here, Defendant Wang claims that he could assert three meritorious defenses: (1) improper service of process; (2) lack of personal jurisdiction; and (3) fair use. (Def. Wang's Reply, ECF No ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.