United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
J. BOYLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
the Court is Plaintiff Sencore, Inc.'s (Sencore) motion
for summary judgment. Doc. 22. For the following reasons, the
Court GRANTS Sencore's motion.
a breach-of-contract case. In April 2015, Sencore and
Defendant Wireless Acquisitions, LLC (Wireless) entered into
an Authorized Reseller Agreement (Agreement) under which
Wireless obtained a license to purchase and resell
Sencore's broadcast equipment. Doc. 22, Pl.'s Mot.
for Summ. J. & Br. in Supp., 5. The Agreement obligates
Sencore to fulfill Wireless's purchase orders and
requires Wireless to pay for the products it requests.
Id. Shortly after obtaining the license, Wireless
executed multiple purchase orders, which Sencore fulfilled by
creating and delivering the products. Id. at 5-7.
But Wireless did not pay Sencore for all of the products it
received. Id. at 7. Sencore claims Wireless still
owes $75, 910.08 for the products, plus $7473.69 in default
interest, for a total of $83, 383.77. Doc. 22-1, Pl.'s
App., 5. After Sencore filed this suit, the parties entered
into a settlement agreement; Wireless agreed to pay a certain
amount of money to Sencore within ninety days to settle
Sencore's claims. Pl.'s Mot. for Summ. J. & Br.
in Supp., 3-4. But Wireless never paid. Id. at 4. So
in November 2017, Sencore moved for summary judgment on its
breach-of-contract claim. Doc. 22. Wireless has not responded
to Sencore's motion. Sencore's motion is ripe for
must grant summary judgment “if the movant shows that
there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the
movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). “A motion for summary judgment
cannot be granted simply because there is no
opposition.” Hibernia Nat'l Bank v.
Administracion Cent. Sociedad Anonima, 776 F.2d 1277,
1279 (5th Cir. 1985). “Nevertheless, if no response to
the motion for summary judgment has been filed, the court may
find as undisputed the statement of facts in the motion for
summary judgment.” Morgan v. Fed. Exp. Corp.,
114 F.Supp.3d 434, 437 (S.D. Tex. 2015). District courts need
not “sift through the record in search of evidence to
support a party's opposition to summary judgment.”
Skotak v. Tenneco Resins, Inc., 953 F.2d
909, 915 n.7 (5th Cir. 1992).
argues it is entitled to summary judgment on its
breach-of-contract claim because it is undisputed that
Wireless agreed to pay Sencore to manufacture and deliver
broadcasting equipment; that Sencore manufactured and
delivered equipment to Wireless; and that Wireless did not
pay Sencore for all of the equipment Wireless received. Doc.
22, Pl.'s Mot. for Summ. J. & Br. in Supp.,
2.Wireless has not responded to Sencore's motion, so the
only question before the Court is whether Sencore is entitled
to judgment as a matter of law under the facts it has
presented in its motion. See Morgan, 114 F.Supp.3d
at 437; see also UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am. v. Long,
227 F.Supp.2d 609, 614 (N.D. Tex. 2002) (“Although the
court may not enter a ‘default' summary judgment,
it may accept the evidence submitted by [the movant] as
prevail on a breach-of-contract claim under Texas law, a
plaintiff must prove: (1) there was a valid contract; (2)
plaintiff performed his or her obligations under the
contract; (3) defendant breached the contract; and (4)
plaintiff suffered damages as a result of defendant's
breach. Smith Int'l, Inc. v. Egle Grp., LLC, 490
F.3d 380, 387 (5th Cir. 2007).
uncontroverted evidence establishes as a matter of law that
Wireless breached the Agreement. The parties entered into the
Agreement on April 15, 2015. Doc. 22-1, Pl.'s App., 7.
The Agreement requires Sencore to fulfill Wireless's
purchase orders and obligates Wireless to pay for the
products it requests. Id. at 11. Sencore fulfilled
each purchase order Wireless submitted by manufacturing and
delivering broadcasting products to Wireless. Id. at
29, 35, 40. Wireless breached the agreement by failing to pay
for all the products it received, and Sencore has
demonstrated that it is entitled to $83, 383.77 in damages.
Id. at 5, 11.
reasons stated, the Court GRANTS
Sencore's motion for summary judgment. Doc. 22. If
Sencore seeks attorney fees, it must do so in a separate
motion by May 25, 2018. Sencore should
attach to its motion for attorney fees a detailed record of
actual time spent on this case.