Oatway v. Experian Information Solutions Inc, 2:24-cv-00523

Plaintiff, Tyler Jordan Oatway, alleges that 700 Credit, LLC, a credit report reseller, provided a credit report showing him as deceased when he sought to purchase a car, causing him financial harm due to a delayed and more expensive loan.
The complaint was filed under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), seeking actual, statutory, and punitive damages as well as attorney's fees and costs.
Oatway filed proof of service showing that 700 Credit was served through its registered agent, but 700 Credit did not initially respond, resulting in a Clerk's entry of default.
Oatway subsequently moved for default judgment, at which point 700 Credit appeared and opposed the motion, arguing service issues and lack of culpability.
On inquiry from the Court, Oatway provided further evidence of valid service, and 700 Credit ultimately filed an answer and appeared in the action.
The issue before the Court was whether to maintain the default and enter default judgment or to vacate the default and allow the case to proceed on the merits.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether to enter default judgment	700 Credit failed to appear after service and is in default	Appearance after subsequent service does not cure prior failure to defend; default is moot due to appearance	Default vacated as there was no culpable conduct and no prejudice to plaintiff
Whether service was proper	Properly served 700 Credit’s registered agent per state records and process server affidavits	Initial service was not proper, or questionable, therefore default improper	Service was sufficient; defendant's later appearance supports vacatur
Whether defendant’s default was culpable	700 Credit intentionally failed to respond after service	Failure to appear not intentional or in bad faith; did not seek advantage	No evidence of bad faith or manipulative conduct by defendant
Whether plaintiff would be prejudiced by setting aside default	Plaintiff entitled to default judgment due to delay and non-response	No prejudice to plaintiff by resolving on merits; delay alone is insufficient	No prejudice to plaintiff; all doubts resolved in favor of disposition on the merits

TCI Grp. Life Ins. Plan v. Knoebber, 244 F.3d 691 (9th Cir. 2001) (sets good cause factors for setting aside default)
United States v. Signed Pers. Check No. 730 of Yubran S. Mesle, 615 F.3d 1085 (9th Cir. 2010) (disjunctive standard and culpable conduct in default)
Falk v. Allen, 739 F.2d 461 (9th Cir. 1984) (default judgment is drastic and cases should be decided on the merits)
O’Connor v. State of Nev., 27 F.3d 357 (9th Cir. 1994) (courts resolve all doubts in favor of setting aside default)
Mendoza v. Wight Vineyard Mgmt., 783 F.2d 941 (9th Cir. 1986) (discretion broad in setting aside entry of default)