United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Stephanie Dawkins Davis United States Magistrate Judge
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
DEFAULT JUDGMENT 
Gershwin A. Drain United States District Court Judge
action arises from J & J Sports Productions, Inc.'s
(“Plaintiff”) allegation that Defendants SJV
Investments, LLC and Steven Villneff violated federal law by
illegally broadcasting a boxing match at Super Sports Bar in
Ecorse, Michigan. Defendants failed to defend or otherwise
appear in this action. Pending before the Court is
Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2). See Dkt.
No. 13. The Court scheduled a hearing on January 17, 2017, at
2:00PM. The Defendants failed to oppose the motion or appear
for the hearing. For the following reasons, the Court will
GRANT Plaintiff's Motion.
case was filed on June 20, 2016 against SJV Investments, LLC
and Steven Villneff. Dkt. No. 1. SJV Investments was served
on July 6, 2016. Defendant Villneff proved to be more
difficult to serve. On August 3, 2016, this Court granted
Plaintiff's Motion for Alternate Service. Dkt. No. 7. The
Court ordered the Plaintiff to serve Defendant Villneff by:
(1) publishing in the Detroit Legal News for three
consecutive weeks; (2) sending process via registered mail to
Defendant Villneff's last known address; and (3) posting
the Summons and Complaint. Id. Plaintiff executed
service on Defendant Villneff, consistently with the
Court's Order, on August 25, 2016. Dkt. No. 8.
to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12, Defendants had
twenty-one days to file an answer or responsive pleading.
Both Defendants failed to meet this deadline. On November 28,
2016, the Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
entered default as to both Defendants. Dkt. Nos. 11, 12. That
same day, Plaintiff moved for Default Judgment. Dkt. No. 13.
Pursuant to LR 7.1(e)(1)(B), Defendants had twenty-one days
to file a response. Defendants failed to meet this deadline.
case arose after a September 14, 2013 Middleweight
Championship boxing match between Floyd “Money”
Mayweather Jr. and Saul “Canelo” Alvarez. Dkt.
No. 1, p. 3 (Pg. ID 3). Plaintiff, J & J Sports
Productions, Inc., paid for the exclusive, closed-circuit,
television distribution rights to the match between
Mayweather and Alvarez. Pursuant to contract, Plaintiff
entered into pay-per-view sublicensing agreements throughout
the nation, Michigan included. Id., p. 4 (Pg. ID 4).
to the Plaintiff, Defendants unlawfully intercepted and
displayed the boxing match at Super Sports Bar, located at
337 Southfield Road in Ecorse, Michigan. Id., pp. 4-5
(Pg. ID 4-5). In the pending Motion for Default Judgment,
Plaintiff claims $4, 200 in damages for the cost of the
program if the defendants had legally purchased it and $3,
049.15 in attorney fees and costs. Dkt. No. 13, p. 3 (Pg. ID
Legal Standard for Default Judgment
of a default against a defendant establishes the
defendant's liability.” Thomas v. Miller,
489 F.3d 293, 299 (6th Cir. 2007) (citing Goldman,
Antonetti, Ferraiuoli, Axtmayer & Hertell v. Medfit
Int'l, Inc., 982 F.2d 686, 693 (1st Cir. 1993)).
“There is no question that, default having been
entered, each of [plaintiff's] allegations of fact must
be taken as true and each of its [ ] claims must be
considered established as a matter of law.”
Id. “The power to enter default judgment
… conclusively establishes every factual predicate of
a claim for relief.” Id.
“[a] default judgment on well-pleaded allegations
establishes only defendant's liability; plaintiff must
still establish the extent of damages.” Antoine v.
Atlas Turner, Inc., 66 F.3d 105, 110 (6th Cir. 1995)
(quoting Kelley v. Carr, 567 F.Supp. 831, 841 (W.D.
Mich. 1983)). “Ordinarily, the District Court must hold
“an evidentiary proceeding in which the defendant has
the opportunity to contest the amount [of damages].”
Id. (citing Greyhound Exhibitgroup, Inc. v.
E.L.U.L. Realty Corp., 973 F.2d 155, 158 (2d Cir. 1992),
cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1080 (1993)).
“Therefore, even if [the defaulting party] is bound on
the issue of liability, it still has the opportunity to
respond to the issue of damages.” Id.
Establishment of Liability
action was brought under the Communications Act of 1934 (47
U.S.C. § 605) and The Cable & Television Consumer
Protection and ...