Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 SCOTT SCHUTZA, Case No.: 26-cv-00861-AJB-BJW 13 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING STIPULATION 14 v. 15 LESLIE’S POOLMART, INC., et al., (Doc. No. 7) 16 Defendants. 17 18 Before the Court is a Stipulation to Set Aside Entry of Default and Extend Time to 19 Respond to Complaint filed by Plaintiff Scott Schutza (“Schutza”) and Defendants Mission 20 Gorge Square LLC and Leslie’s Poolmart, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”). (Doc. No. 7.) 21 Schutza initiated this action in February 2026 and served summons and copies of the 22 complaint on Defendants the following month. (Doc. Nos. 1; 3; 4.) Defendants’ responses 23 to the complaint were due by the end of March. (Doc. No. 5.) Because Defendants failed 24 to meet their deadlines, the Court entered directed the Clerk of Court to enter default against 25 Defendants. (Id.) The Clerk of Court entered default against Defendants. (Doc. No. 6.) 26 The parties have now filed a stipulation agreeing to set aside the entry of default and 27 extend Defendants’ deadline to submit a responsive filing to April 21, 2026. (Doc. No. 7.) 28 The Court does not approve the parties’ stipulation. 1 First, the Court does not recognize stipulations in this regard. CivLR 7.2.b; J. 2 Battaglia Civ. Case Proc. § IV.A. 3 Second, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(c) authorizes a court to set aside an entry 4 of default when good cause exists. To establish good cause, a party must address 5 “(1) whether the party seeking to set aside the default engaged in culpable conduct that led 6 to the default; (2) whether it had no meritorious defense; [and] (3) whether reopening the 7 default judgment would prejudice” the opposing party. United States v. Signed Personal 8 Check No. 730 of Yubran S. Mesle, 615 F.3d 1085, 1091 (9th Cir. 2010) (cleaned up). The 9 parties do not address any of these factors. (See generally Doc. No. 7.) Instead, they simply 10 “agree that good cause exists to set aside the Clerk’s entry of default pursuant to Federal 11 Rule of Civil Procedure 55(c).” (Id.) Absent any explanation, the Court is not inclined to 12 accept the parties’ conclusory statement. 13 Third, the Court expects parties to request continuances at least seven days before 14 the date they seek to change. Battaglia Civ. Case Proc. § IV.C. In requesting a continuance, 15 parties must address “(1) the original date and proposed date; (2) good cause for the 16 requested change; (3) the number of previous continuances and requests that have been 17 made; (4) whether previous requests were granted or denied; (5) how this request will 18 impact other dates or deadlines; and (6) how the parties fulfilled the Court’s meet-and- 19 confer requirement.” Id. Additionally, parties “must address excusable neglect for the 20 request’s untimeliness” for requests that are not made at least seven days before the date 21 they seek to change. Id. Over a week and a half after the deadlines have lapsed, the parties 22 seek to extend Defendants’ deadlines roughly four weeks. (Compare Doc. No. 7, with Doc. 23 No. 5.) Yet the parties do not address any of these factors. (See generally Doc. No. 7.) 24 Accordingly, the Court DENIES the Stipulation to Set Aside Entry of Default and 25 Extend Time to Respond to Complaint. If the parties still wish to set aside the entry of 26 default and to extend Defendants’ deadline to submit a responsive filing, the parties must 27 submit a motion that complies with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules 28 of Practice for the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, and 1 undersigned’s Civil Case Procedures. The Court additionally admonishes counsel to 2 ||review the Local Rules of Practice as well as the undersigned’s Civil Case Procedures. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 || Dated: April 7, 2026 6 United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28