SUSAN C. BUCKLEW, District Judge.
This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for Clerk's Default. (Doc. No. 9). As explained below, the motion is denied without prejudice.
Plaintiff filed this lawsuit on June 29, 2015. (Doc. No. 1). On July 17, 2015, in response to the complaint, Defendants, proceeding pro se, submitted a letter to the Court. (Doc. No. 6). The Court struck the letter, because submitting a letter to the Court is not the proper way to respond to a complaint. (Doc. No. 7). The Court directed Defendants to file an answer or motion to dismiss in response to the complaint by August 24, 2015. (Doc. No. 7). Defendants did not submit a response.
The Court's internal docket sheet, however, does not indicate that the Court's order was mailed to Defendants when issued on July 24, 2015. In an abundance of caution, on September 1, 2015, the Court resent the order to Defendants. As such, the Court will give Defendants until September 30, 2015 to respond to the complaint. If they fail to do so, the Court will entertain a renewed motion for entry of Clerk's default.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion for Clerk's Default (Doc. No. 9) is