Heidarpour v. Secured Marketing Concepts Corporation
District Court, D. Arizona
1Opinion
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Fred Heidarpour, No. CV-24-00239-PHX-KML 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 Secured Marketing Concepts Corporation, 13 Defendant. 14 15 Plaintiff Fred Heidarpour filed this suit after receiving pre-recorded calls from 16 defendant Secured Marketing Concepts Corporation. Defendant was served but did not 17 respond and its default was entered. (Doc. 20.) Heidarpour seeks default judgment in the 18 amount of $7,500. 19 The court must consider seven factors when deciding whether to enter default 20 judgment. Eitel v.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Gary R. Eitel v. William D. McCoolCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Pepsico, Inc. v. California Security CansDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2002
- Landstar Ranger, Inc. v. PARTH ENTERPRISES, INC.District Court, C.D. California · 2010
- Jesse Meyer v. Portfolio Recovery AssociatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Curtis v. Illumination Arts, Inc.District Court, W.D. Washington · 2014
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.