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.

Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Mikho's Hookah Lounge Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Michigan

August 8, 2019

Joe Hand Promotions, Inc., Plaintiff,
v.
Mikho's Hookha Lounge Inc., et al., Defendants.

          Hon. Janet T. Neff Judge.

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          ELLEN S. CARMODY U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment (ECF No. 46), which was referred to the undersigned by the Honorable Janet T. Neff for report and recommendation under 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B). Defendants Mikho's Hookha Lounge Inc., Simon Mikho, and Sarmad Mikho were properly served in this matter. (ECF Nos. 41 and 42). Defendants failed to answer or otherwise plead, and default was entered pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(a) as to Mikho's Hookha Lounge Inc., Simon Mikho, and Sarmad Mikho on June 21, 2019 (ECF No. 44). Plaintiff filed its motion for default judgment (ECF No. 46) on July 9, 2019.

         THE PARTIES

         This action involves a claim for damages by Plaintiff Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. against Defendants, Simon Mikho, Sarmad Mikho, individually and as officers, directors, shareholders, members and/or principals of Mikho's Hookha Lounge Inc. and Mikho's Hookha Lounge Inc. d/b/a Mikho Middle Eastern Cuisine & Lounge, for misappropriation of the closed circuit Ultimate Fighting Championship® 198: Werdum vs. Miocic broadcast in violation of 47 U.S.C. § 605, et seq., and 47 U.S.C. § 553, et seq. Mikho's Hookha Lounge Inc., Simon Mikho, and Sarmad Mikho are not minors or incompetent persons. As the defendants have not answered or otherwise pled, the allegations against Mikho's Hookha Lounge Inc., Simon Mikho, and Sarmad Mikho are deemed admitted pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(b)(6).

         STANDARD

         The rule governing default judgment is Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(b), which reads as follows:

(b) Entering a Default Judgment.
(1) By the Clerk. If the plaintiff's claim is for a sum certain or a sum that can be made certain by computation, the clerk-on the plaintiff's request, with an affidavit showing the amount due-must enter judgment for that amount and costs against a defendant who has been defaulted for not appearing and who is neither a minor nor an incompetent person.
(2) By the Court. In all other cases, the party must apply to the court for a default judgment. A default judgment may be entered against a minor or incompetent person only if represented by a general guardian, conservator, or other like fiduciary who has appeared. If the party against whom a default judgment is sought has appeared personally or by a representative, that party or its representative must be served with written notice of the application at least 7 days before the hearing. The court may conduct hearings or make referrals- preserving any federal statutory right to a jury trial-when, to enter or effectuate judgment, it needs to:
(A) conduct an accounting;
(B) determine the amount of damages;
(C) establish the truth of any allegation by ...

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.