JKN Universe v. VVV Global Ent. LLC

Background

VVV Global Ent. LLC obtained Clerk’s certificates of default against third-party defendants BDE Miss USA, LLC and Thom Brodeur. VVV also asked the court to require Brodeur to sit for a deposition and require BDE and Brodeur to produce documents before the December 11, 2025 hearing on VVV’s motion for a preliminary injunction, if the court vacated the defaults.

BDE and Brodeur’s response deadlines were November 18 and November 19, 2025. Their counsel appeared on November 19, sought an extension, and later sought VVV’s consent to a proposed schedule for a motion to dismiss. VVV refused the proposed extension. BDE and Brodeur also objected to discovery on the ground that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over them.

Reasons for Vacating the Defaults

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(c), a court may set aside an entry of default for good cause. The court considered whether the default was willful, whether BDE and Brodeur had potentially valid defenses, and whether vacating the defaults would prejudice VVV. The court also considered the preference for resolving disputes on their merits rather than by default.

The court found that all three factors favored vacatur. First, counsel’s efforts to obtain an extension showed diligence rather than willful default. Second, BDE and Brodeur identified potentially meritorious defenses to VVV’s claim that they tortiously interfered with the contract between VVV and JKN Universe, LLC. In particular, JKN alleged that it terminated its agreement with VVV because of VVV’s mismanagement. If that allegation were correct, the court stated that VVV’s claim that BDE and Brodeur caused the termination would likely fail. Third, the court found no prejudice from the short delay because there was no basis to believe it would cause loss of evidence, make discovery more difficult, or increase the opportunity for fraud or collusion.

The court also stated that BDE and Brodeur could seek to vacate the defaults while preserving their objection to personal jurisdiction. Their default did not eliminate their ability to challenge personal jurisdiction in a later default-judgment proceeding.

Discovery Requests and Disposition

The court denied without prejudice VVV’s request to depose Brodeur before the preliminary-injunction hearing. VVV had not shown a connection between the requested expedited discovery and avoiding the alleged irreparable injury, or that the potential injury without expedited discovery outweighed the injury Brodeur would suffer if the request were granted. The court denied the request to compel document responses for the same reasons. The deposition request could be renewed if BDE and Brodeur submitted a declaration from Brodeur opposing the preliminary-injunction motion.

Judge Lewis J. Liman ordered the certificates of default at Dkt. Nos. 88 and 89 vacated, directed that the related matters at Dkt. Nos. 82 and 84 be closed, and clarified that VVV’s reply papers supporting its preliminary-injunction motion were due December 10, 2025, at 12:00 p.m., rather than December 11, 2025. The opinion did not decide the underlying claims or the preliminary-injunction motion.