Johnson v. Burns, 4:19-cv-04109. (2019)
Court: District Court, W.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20191016931
Visitors: 10
Filed: Oct. 15, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 15, 2019
Summary: ORDER BARRY A. BRYANT , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, Charles Samuel Johnson Jr., filed this 28 U.S.C. 1983 action pro se on September 5, 2019. (ECF No. 1). Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment. (ECF No. 9). Defendants have filed a Response. (ECF No. 10). On September 6, 2016, this Court entered an order directing service on Defendants. (ECF No. 6). This order directed Defendants to answer within 21 days from the date of service. Id. Plaintiff asks the Court to enter j
Summary: ORDER BARRY A. BRYANT , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, Charles Samuel Johnson Jr., filed this 28 U.S.C. 1983 action pro se on September 5, 2019. (ECF No. 1). Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment. (ECF No. 9). Defendants have filed a Response. (ECF No. 10). On September 6, 2016, this Court entered an order directing service on Defendants. (ECF No. 6). This order directed Defendants to answer within 21 days from the date of service. Id. Plaintiff asks the Court to enter ju..
More
ORDER
BARRY A. BRYANT, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff, Charles Samuel Johnson Jr., filed this 28 U.S.C. § 1983 action pro se on September 5, 2019. (ECF No. 1). Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment. (ECF No. 9). Defendants have filed a Response. (ECF No. 10). On September 6, 2016, this Court entered an order directing service on Defendants. (ECF No. 6). This order directed Defendants to answer within 21 days from the date of service. Id. Plaintiff asks the Court to enter judgment in his favor because he claims Defendants failed to file their answer within 21 days from the date the Court ordered service. (ECF No. 9). However, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(1)(A)(i) requires Defendants to file an answer within 21 days after being served with a summons and complaint, not the date the Court orders service.
Defendants were served on September 16, 2016. (ECF No. 9). Defendants filed their answer on October 2, 2019, which is well within the 21-day timeframe set forth in the Federal Rules. (ECF No. 8). Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment (ECF No. 9) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
