From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Craters & Freighters v. Benz

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Jan 11, 2012
465 F. App'x 719 (9th Cir. 2012)

Opinion

No. 10-16004 D.C. No. 4:09-cv-04531-CW

01-11-2012

CRATERS & FREIGHTERS, a Colorado corporation, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. FRED BENZ; KATHY BENZ, Defendants - Appellants, and DAISYCHAIN ENTERPRISES, a California corporation, Defendant.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Claudia A. Wilken, District Judge, Presiding

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

Fred and Kathy Benz appeal pro se from the district court's default judgment in this action alleging trademark infringement, copyright infringement, and related claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the issue of whether a party has waived a defense, Owens v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan, Inc., 244 F.3d 708, 713 (9th Cir. 2001), and we affirm.

The district court properly concluded that the Benzes waived their defense of insufficient service of process based on their litigation conduct. See Peterson v. Highland Music, Inc., 140 F.3d 1313, 1317-18 (9th Cir. 1998) (defenses, such as lack of personal jurisdiction, may be waived as a result of a party's litigation conduct, including when the party raises the defense but does not pursue it further until an adverse decision on the merits).

The Benzes' remaining contentions are unavailing.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Craters & Freighters v. Benz

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Jan 11, 2012
465 F. App'x 719 (9th Cir. 2012)
Case details for

Craters & Freighters v. Benz

Case Details

Full title:CRATERS & FREIGHTERS, a Colorado corporation, Plaintiff - Appellee, v…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Jan 11, 2012

Citations

465 F. App'x 719 (9th Cir. 2012)

Citing Cases

R. Prasad Indus. v. Flat Irons Envtl. Sols. Corp.

This rule applies even "when the party raises the defense but does not pursue it further" in a timely manner.…

In re Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litig.

But having raised the issue at an early stage of the proceedings does not mean that a party cannot waive it…