Lazzaro v. Accelerated Inventory Management, LLC
- Charles Breyer
- 3:25-cv-03566
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate and have been consolidated across spelling variants.
In Lazzaro v. Accelerated Inventory Management, Judge Breyer granted Kavyon’s motion to set aside default and denied Lazzaro’s default-judgment motion.
Robert Kavyon’s entry of default was set aside, and Christopher Lazzaro’s request for default judgment against Kavyon was denied.
What happened
In Lazzaro v. Accelerated Inventory Management, LLC, Christopher Lazzaro sought default judgment against Robert Kavyon after Kavyon did not timely respond to the lawsuit. The clerk entered default against Kavyon.
Kavyon later asked the court to remove the default. The court found good cause because the failure resulted from carelessness and a medical emergency, Kavyon might have a valid defense, and removing the default would not unfairly harm Lazzaro.
Judge Breyer granted Kavyon’s motion to set aside the entry of default and denied Lazzaro’s motion for default judgment. The court did not decide whether Kavyon would ultimately win the case.
The detailed version
- Lazzaro v. Accelerated Inventory Management, LLC · No. 3:25-cv-03566
- Charles Breyer
- July 31, 2025
Background
Christopher Lazzaro sued Accelerated Inventory Management, LLC; Scott & Associates; and Robert Kavyon, alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and California law in connection with efforts to collect a debt. The court had already granted motions to dismiss filed by Accelerated Inventory Management and Scott & Associates.
Lazzaro initially had difficulty serving Kavyon, but the court allowed alternative service. After Kavyon was served, he did not timely file an answer or another response. The clerk entered default against him. Lazzaro then moved for default judgment. An attorney later appeared for Kavyon and moved to set aside the entry of default.
Court’s Analysis
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(c) allows a court to set aside an entry of default when there is “good cause.” The court considered three factors: whether Kavyon engaged in blameworthy conduct causing the default, whether he had a potentially valid defense, and whether setting aside the default would prejudice Lazzaro.
The court found that all three factors favored Kavyon. First, it found no bad faith or intentional effort to manipulate the case. Although Kavyon’s counsel should have acted more carefully, the court concluded that simple carelessness was not enough to make the failure to respond inexcusable. The court also considered a sworn declaration describing emergency medical procedures that occurred around the time Kavyon should have responded.
Second, the court found that Kavyon had a potentially valid defense. Lazzaro’s allegations against Kavyon were materially similar to allegations against the other defendants, which the court had found legally insufficient. The court expressly did not decide whether a future motion to dismiss by Kavyon would succeed.
Third, the court found that Lazzaro would not be legally prejudiced by setting aside the default. Mere delay was not enough, and Lazzaro did not explain how his ability to pursue his claims would be hindered.
Ruling
The court concluded that good cause supported setting aside the entry of default and that the case did not present the extreme circumstances required for default judgment. Judge Charles R. Breyer therefore GRANTED Kavyon’s motion to set aside the entry of default and DENIED Lazzaro’s motion for default judgment. This order did not decide the ultimate merits of Lazzaro’s claims against Kavyon.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.