IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division

POTOMAC ELECTRIC POWER ) COMPANY, ) Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 1:24-cv-1466 (RDA/WBP) A.F. MENSAH INC, et al., Defendants. ORDER This matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (“Recommendation”) issued by U.S. Magistrate Judge William B. Porter on July 24, 2025. Dkt. 23. On August 21, 2024, Plaintiff Potomac Electric Power Company (“PEPCO”) filed a four count Complaint against Defendants alleging claims of breach of contract, unjust enrichment, quantum meruit, and constructive trust. Dkt. 1. On April 23, 2025, PEPCO filed a Motion for Default Judgment against Defendants. Dkt. 16. On June 13, 2025, PEPCO filed an Amended Motion for Default Judgment. Dkt. 20. Magistrate Judge Porter recommends that default judgment be entered against Defendants. Dkt. 23. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2), the deadline for submitting objections to Magistrate Judge Porter’s Recommendation was August 7, 2025. To date, no objections have been filed.

After reviewing the record and Magistrate Judge Porter’s Recommendation, and finding no clear error,! the Court hereby APPROVES and ADOPTS the Recommendation (Dkt. 23). Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment (DKkt. 20) is GRANTED, and it is FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk enter default judgment for Plaintiff PEPCO and against Mensah INC; and it is FURTHER ORDERED that Mensah LLC be DISMISSED from this action; and it is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff be awarded damages in the total amount of $2,768,112.07 as detailed in the chart below: Category of Damages Amount of Damages Contractor Costs for the Livingston Road Project $1.684,393,23 Material Costs for the Livingston Road Project $85,372.14 (‘Total $2,768,112.07 The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff, forward copies of this Order to all parties, and close this civil action. It is SO ORDERED. Alexandria, Virginia amet 2025 /s/ Rossie D, Alston, Jr. United States District Judge

' See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co.,

(4th Cir. 2005) (in the absence of any objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation, the Court “need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must ‘only satisfy that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation’”).