Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Puckett v. Sweis, 2:15-cv-0602 TLN AC P. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20180301k37 Visitors: 18
Filed: Feb. 27, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 27, 2018
Summary: ORDER ALLISON CLAIRE , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff has filed a request for default judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b). ECF No. 36. He presumably seeks a default judgment against defendants Bivin, Bracho, Compton, Forsterer, Lightfield, Rasmussen, and Sweis. 1 Plaintiff alleges that as of February 7, 2018, defendants have not responded to the complaint. Id. Defendants' response to the complaint was due by January 30, 2018 ( see ECF No. 29), and they timely answer
More

ORDER

Plaintiff has filed a request for default judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b). ECF No. 36. He presumably seeks a default judgment against defendants Bivin, Bracho, Compton, Forsterer, Lightfield, Rasmussen, and Sweis.1 Plaintiff alleges that as of February 7, 2018, defendants have not responded to the complaint. Id. Defendants' response to the complaint was due by January 30, 2018 (see ECF No. 29), and they timely answered the complaint on January 26, 20182 (EFC No. 31). Accordingly, defendants are not in default and default judgment cannot be entered.

To the extent plaintiff may also be attempting to obtain a default judgment against defendant Gomez, Gomez cannot be in default because he has not yet been served by the United States Marshal. Gomez has not been served because plaintiff has not returned the necessary service documents. Plaintiff's deadline to complete and submit the service paperwork for defendant Gomez is March 1, 2018. ECF No. 35.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's request for default judgment (EFC No. 36) is denied.

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to correct the docket to reflect that the correct names of defendants "Bivens," "Forester," and "Ramussen" are, respectively, "Bivin," "Forsterer," and "Rasmusen."

FootNotes


1. Based on defendants' response to the complaint, defendants "Bivens," "Forester," and "Ramussen" are in fact "Bivin," "Forsterer," and "Rasmussen," and the Clerk of the Court will be directed to update the docket accordingly.
2. It appears that defendants failed to re-serve plaintiff after receiving notice of his change of address on January 26, 2018 (EFC No. 30), though they have since corrected this oversight (ECF No. 37).
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