Opinion
Civil Action No. 08-cv-00418-BNB-MEH
07-31-2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ROHIT SETHI, CHARLES ELROY VANCURA, a/k/a CHUCK VANCURA, and JAMES BRYAN VANCURA, Defendants.
Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland
ORDER
This matter arises on the United States' Motion for Order Entering Consent Judgment of Defendant Charles Vancura By Plaintiff United States [Doc. # 78, filed 7/6/2012] (the "Motion"). Although the United States asserts that the Motion is opposed, Motion [Doc. # 78] at 123, Charles Vancura has not responded to it. The Motion [Doc. # 78] is GRANTED, and the Clerk of the Court is directed to enter Consent Judgments against Charles Vancura.
The facts underlying this action and the Motion are set out in my Order [Doc. # 75] dated May 4, 2012. At the time of that Order, there was an indication, based on information and belief, that defendant Charles VanCura had "filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in Los Angeles, California.. .." Response [Doc. # 73] at p. 3. The United States acknowledged that Charles VanCura might be entitled to the protections of the automatic bankruptcy stay provided in 11 U.S.C. § 362, if such a bankruptcy was pending. Consequently, I refused to order that judgment be entered against Charles VanCura at that time, allowing the United States an opportunity to investigate the matter. Order [Doc. # 75] at p. 4. I am now informed by the United States, and Charles VanCura does not dispute it, that "[o]n May 31, 2012, the Bankruptcy Court entered an Order closing Defendant Charles Elroy VanCura's bankruptcy and ordering 'No Discharge.'" Motion [Doc. # 78] at ¶20.
The plaintiff is the United States of America, and jurisdiction exists in this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1345. Consequently, I have jurisdiction to enforce the Stipulated Settlement Agreement. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 511 U.S. 375, 382 (1994)(noting that a federal district court has jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement where "there is some independent basis for federal jurisdiction").
It is undisputed that Charles VanCura has breached the Stipulated Settlement Agreement by failing to make the $400,000 payment due on or before December 31, 2011, and by failing to follow the notice and payment plan provisions contained in that agreement. Order [Doc. # 75] at p. 3. The United States, consequently, is pursuing a Consent Judgment against Charles VanCura, as is its right under the terms of the parties' agreement. Stipulated Settlement Agreement [Doc. # 67] at ¶24.
IT IS ORDERED:
(1) The Motion [Doc. # 78] is GRANTED.
(2) The Consent Judgment in the form of Exhibit 1 attached hereto shall be entered against Charles Elroy VanCura .
(4) The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
BY THE COURT:
________________________
United States Magistrate Judge