MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDERI. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Robert Stridiron commenced this action on January 27, 2019, alleging Defendant Community Broadcasters, LLC, infringed on Plaintiff’s copyright and seeking actual or statutory damages, as well as costs, expenses, and attorney’s fees. See Dkt. No. 1. After Defendant failed to respond to proper service, Plaintiff filed a Request for Entry of Default. See Dkt. No. 8. Upon the Clerk’s Entry of Default as to Defendant, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Default Judgment, which is now before the Court. See Dkt. No. 11.II. BACKGROUNDPlaintiff is a professional photographer who licenses his photographs to media outlets for a fee. Dkt. No. 1 at 5. Plaintiff’s usual place of business is 78-28 88th Road, Woodhaven, New York 11421. Id. In his professional capacity, Plaintiff photographed a crime scene in Brooklyn, New York (the “Photograph”). Id. at 7; Dkt. No. 1-2 at 2. Plaintiff is the author and sole owner of the Photograph and initially published it on June 2, 2017. Id. at 8; Dkt. No. 11-1 at 6. Plaintiff then registered the Photograph with the United States Copyright Office, where the Photograph was given registration number VA 2-064-636. Id. at 9. The effective date of copyright registration was August 28, 2017. Dkt. No. 11-1 at 6.Defendant is a broadcasting company that operates radio stations in New York, South Carolina, and Florida, and is a limited liability company organized under New York State law. See Dkt. No. 1 at 6; Fla. Dep’t of State, Div. of Corps., Application by Foreign Limited Liability Company for Authorization to Transact Business in Florida, http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/ConvertTiffToPDF?storagePath=COR percent 5C20 16 percent 5C0706 percent 5C00160026.Tif&documentNumber=M16000005335 (last visited June 4, 2019); Community Broadcasters, LLC, “About,” http://www.commbroadcasters.com/about/ (last visited June 4, 2019). In connection with Defendant’s Florida Market, Defendant owns and operates a website at the URL www.CBEmeraldCoast.com. Dkt. No. 1 at 6.Plaintiff alleges that on Defendant’s above-referenced website, Defendant ran an article titled, Gunman shoots NYPD officer in arm, bulletproof vest before killing self, which featured the Photograph without a license, permission, or consent from Plaintiff. Dkt. No. 1 at
10, 11; see Dkt. No. 1-3. On January 2019, Plaintiff commenced this lawsuit alleging Defendant infringed Plaintiff’s copyright and exclusive rights to the Photograph under Sections 106 and 501 of the Copyright Act. See Dkt. No. 1 at 14. Service upon Defendant was completed by serving the New York State Department of State on January 29, 2019. See Dkt. Nos. 1, 2, 6. To date, Defendant has not filed an answer or any other response to the Complaint.On April 4, 2019, Plaintiff requested an entry of default against Defendant. Dkt. No. 8. The Clerk of the Court entered default on April 5, 2019. Dkt. No. 9. On May 10, 2019, Plaintiff filed the present motion seeking a default judgment against Defendant pursuant to Rule 55(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Dkt. No. 11. Defendant has not responded to Plaintiff’s motion.III. DISCUSSIONA. Default JudgmentOnce the Clerk enters a party’s default pursuant to Rule 55(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP), the court may enter a judgment against the defaulting party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2). “That rule, in tandem with the Northern District of New York Local Rule 55.2, sets forth certain procedural prerequisites that must be met before a default judgment may be entered.” Pert 35, Inc. v. Amari Aviation Ltd., No. 09-CV-0448, 2010 WL 1257949, *3 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2010) (citation omitted). The moving party must “1) show that the defendant was properly served with a summons and complaint; 2) obtain the entry to default; and 3) provide an affidavit setting forth the salient facts including, if the defendant is a person, showing that he or she is not an infant or incompetent, or a member of the United States Military Service.” Id. (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b); N.Y.N.D. L.R. 55.1, 55.2) (other citations omitted).The Second Circuit has “generally disfavored” granting default judgment because it is an extreme remedy, and while it may be efficient, the court must weigh its interest in expediency against the need to afford all litigants the opportunity to be heard. Enron Oil Corp. v. Diakuhara, 10 F.3d 90, 95-96 (2d Cir. 1993) (citing Merker v. Rice, 649 F.2d 171, 174 (2d Cir. 1981); Gill v. Stolow, 240 F.2d 669, 670 (2d Cir. 1957)). Although the Second Circuit has a clear preference for deciding cases on the merits, district courts are given discretion to assess the individual circumstances of each case and grant default judgment where appropriate. Enron Oil Corp., 10 F.3d at 95-96 (citing Action S.A. v. Marc Rich & Co., 951 F.2d 504, 507 (2d Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 1006 (1992); Traguth v. Zuck, 710 F.2d 90, 94 (2d Cir. 1983); Meehan v. Snow, 652 F.2d 274, 277 (2d Cir. 1981)). However, when a motion for default judgment is unopposed, the movant only needs to satisfy the “modest burden of demonstrating entitlement to the relief requested.” Rusyniak v. Gensini, No. 5:07-CV-0279, 2009 WL 3672105, *1 n.1 (N.D.N.Y. Oct. 30, 2009) (quoting Cossey v. David, No. 04-CV-1501, 2007 WL 3171819, *7 (N.D.N.Y. Oct. 29, 2007)).In this case, Plaintiff has produced evidence demonstrating Defendant was properly served in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and New York State laws. See Dkt. No. 6; Dkt. No. 11-1 at
