Amazon.Com Inc. v. Wasim

Background

The plaintiffs had filed a motion for default judgment against multiple defendants who had not participated in the case. Two listed defaulting defendants, Mohammad Mudassar Anwar and Tech Drive Pvt. LLC, had recently appeared through counsel. The opinion refers to them collectively as the “New York Defendants” and states that Tech Drive Pvt. LLC is a New York limited liability company.

The New York Defendants asked the Clerk’s Entry of Default to be set aside and moved to dismiss the case for lack of personal jurisdiction. They also argued that venue was improper. The court noted that their motion did not explain why they had not participated in the case earlier.

Order

The court directed the plaintiffs to submit briefing on two issues: whether the court had jurisdiction to enter a default judgment, and how the New York Defendants’ appearance and arguments affected the factors for deciding default judgment under Eitel v. McCool. The court explained that addressing jurisdiction was relevant because a default judgment entered without jurisdiction could later be challenged as invalid.

The plaintiffs’ response was due January 6, 2025. The New York Defendants could file a reply by January 13, 2025. The court prohibited sur-replies and additional briefing unless it later ordered otherwise.

Disposition

This is an order for briefing. It does not grant or deny the plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment, the New York Defendants’ request to set aside the Clerk’s Entry of Default, or their motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The order was signed by United States Magistrate Judge Robert M. Illman.