United States v. Ken International Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that “Defendant does not need to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits. Rather, defendant’s averments need only plausibly suggest the existence of facts which, if proven at trial, would constitute a cognizable defense.”
• finding without further discussion “[p]laintiff has not identified any potential prejudice, and the Court finds that plaintiff will not be prejudiced in any significant way if the default is set aside”
• characterizing the Rule 55(c) standard as “fairly liberal” and citing Gomes
• “[D]efendant’s averments need only plausibly suggest the existence of facts which, if proven at trial, would constitute a cognizable defense.”
• “defendant's averments need only plausibly suggest the existence of facts which, if proven at trial, would constitute a cognizable defense.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).