Sullivan v. Cook et al
ORDER denying without prejudice 25 Motion for Default Judgment. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 08/30/2012. (jak)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
AUSTIN LEE SULLIVAN
DALE COOK, Sheriff of
Mississippi County; et al.
On April 3, 2012, Mr. Sullivan filed a pro se Complaint, pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment. (Doc. No. 25).
Mr. Sullivan is correct in his assertion that Rule 12(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure provides a defendant must serve an answer within twenty-one (21) days of being
served with the summons and complaint. FED. R. CIV. P. 12(a)(1)(A).
however, have not been served with the Complaint (Doc. No. 2).
Prior to ordering service of the Complaint, the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act
requires courts to, as soon as practicable, screen a complaint in which a prisoner seeks
redress from a governmental entity or an officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28
U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In performing this function, the court must identify “cognizable claims
or dismiss the complaint, or any portion [thereof, that] is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1).
Because service is not appropriate until the court has an opportunity to screen
Plaintiff’s Complaint, his Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. No. 25) is premature and is
DENIED without prejudice. The Court will screen the Complaint as soon as possible.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 30th day of August, 2012.
JOE J. VOLPE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?