Dist.Ct. did not err in granting plaintiff's motion for default judgment and entry of damages,as well as injunction in plaintiff's Lanham Act claim, alleging trademark infringement, false advertising, dilution and unfair competition arising out of defendant's unauthorized and unlawful sale of plaintiff's products bearing Prevagen trademark. Ct. rejected defendant's claim that Dist. Ct. had failed to make requisite findings under Rule 52(a) to support instant judgment, since said Rule does not apply to rulings on motions for default judgment. Moreover, record supported Dist. Ct.'s entry of order enjoining defendant from selling stolen Prevagen products, since such fact was contained in complaint, and thus was established when default judgment had been entered. As such, no further comment or fact-finding on said issue by Dist. Ct. was required.
