Anderson v. Cahlander et al

Filing 26

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending that Plaintiff's 25 Motion to Enter Default be Denied signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 10/17/2014. Referred to Judge O'Neill; Objections to F&R due by 11/6/2014.(Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11

DION ANDERSON,

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
vs.
L. CAHLANDER, et al.,

15

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:12-cv-01966 LJO DLB PC
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMENDING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO ENTER DEFAULT BE DENIED
[ECF No. 25]

16
17

Plaintiff Dion Anderson (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se and

18

in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this

19

action on December 3, 2012.

20
21
22

On June 7, 2013, the Court dismissed the complaint and granted Plaintiff leave to file a
First Amended Complaint. On August 23, 2013, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint. On
July 10, 2014, he filed a motion for leave to file a Second Amended Complaint and lodged the

23

proposed Second Amended Complaint. On August 25, 2014, the Court granted the motion to file
24
25
26
27
28

a Second Amended Complaint. The Second Amended Complaint is currently pending screening
by the Court.
On October 14, 2014, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for entry of default. Plaintiff
contends that Defendants have neither filed an answer, extension of time, or entered the
1

1
2
3
4

appearance of an attorney within the time deadline. Plaintiff is advised that service of process
has not yet been effected on Defendants, triggering their obligation to respond to his complaint.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e). In this case, the United States Marshal will be directed to initiate service of
process on Plaintiff’s behalf when the Court has determined that Plaintiff’s complaint states

5

cognizable claims for relief and service is appropriate. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); Fed. R. Civ. P.
6
7
8

4(c)(2). The Court has not yet screened the Second Amended Complaint. Therefore, service is
not yet appropriate.
RECOMMENDATION

9
10
11

For all of the foregoing reasons, this Court recommends that Plaintiff's motion to enter
default against Defendants be DENIED.

12

These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

13

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen

14

(14) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, the parties may file

15

written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate

16

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections

17
18

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v.
Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.

21
22

Dated:

/s/ Dennis

October 17, 2014

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28
2