Opinion
1:20-cv-1675-NONE-JLT
09-21-2021
NAUTILUS INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. ELVIA GONZALEZ, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT (DOC. NOS. 19, 22)
Nautilus Insurance Company asserts that under an insurance policy issued to the California Teachers Association, the company had no duty to defend or indemnify Elvia Gonzalez in an underlying civil action filed by Gerard L. in Kern County Superior Court. Nautilus and Gonzalez reached an agreement that judgment be entered against Gonzalez. (See Doc. No. 17.) Plaintiff seeks the entry of default judgment against Gerard L. (Doc. No. 19.)
The assigned magistrate judge determined the factors set forth by the Ninth Circuit in Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470 (9th Cir. 1986), weighed in favor of the entry of default judgment. (Doc. No. 22 at 5-9.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended the pending motion for default judgment be granted, and the court enter judgment finding Nautilus had no duty to defend or indemnify Elvia Gonzalez in the underlying state action. (Id. at 8-9.)
The parties were given fourteen days to file any objections to the recommendations. (Doc. No. 9 at 9.) The parties were “advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order.” (Id., citing Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991); Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 834 (9th Cir. 2014)). Thus, any objections were to be filed no later than September 7, 2021. To date, no objections have been filed by either party.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi Valley United School Dist, 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), this court conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Accordingly, 1. The findings and recommendations dated August 24, 2021 (Doc. No. 22) are adopted in full;
2. Plaintiff s motion for default judgment (Doc. No. 19) is granted;
3. The court finds Nautilus Insurance Company had no duty to defend Elvia Gonzalez in the underlying state court action;
4. The court finds Nautilus Insurance Company had no duty to indemnify Elvia Gonzalez in the underlying state court action;
5. Judgment shall be entered in favor of Plaintiff and against Elvia Gonzalez pursuant to the agreement of the parties (Doc. No. 17); and
6. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.