Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

(PC) Urquiza v. Yoder, 1:16-cv-01563-LJO-MJS (PC). (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20171130c93 Visitors: 8
Filed: Nov. 28, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 28, 2017
Summary: ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT (ECF No. 16) MICHAEL J. SENG , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1983. The action proceeds on Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Yoder. (ECF No. 9.) On October 16, 2017, Defendant Yoder timely responded to the complaint by filing a motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 15.) See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(4), 12(b). On October 20
More

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

(ECF No. 16)

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds on Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Yoder. (ECF No. 9.)

On October 16, 2017, Defendant Yoder timely responded to the complaint by filing a motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 15.) See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(4), 12(b). On October 20, 2017, Plaintiff moved for entry of default. (ECF No. 16.)

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) requires the Clerk of Court to enter default against a party when that party has "failed to plead or otherwise defend, and that failure is shown by affidavit or otherwise." Here, Defendant Yoder timely responded to Plaintiff's complaint. There is no basis for entering default against him.

Accordingly, Plaintiff's request for entry of default is HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer