Davis v. Molina et al
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATION Regarding Plaintiff's Request for Entry of Default re 7 , signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 12/13/14. Referred to Judge O'Neill. Fourteen-Day Deadline. (Gonzalez, R)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CHARLES T. DAVIS,
A. MOLINA, et al.,
Case No. 1:14-cv-01554 LJO DLB PC
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR
ENTRY OF DEFAULT
[ECF No. 7]
Plaintiff Charles T. Davis (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se in this
civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on October 2, 2014.
On December 5, 2014, Plaintiff filed a request seeking default judgment against Defendant
Wilson. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Plaintiff submits a proof of service showing service of summons was
effected on Defendant R. Wilson, P.A., on September 25, 2014. Plaintiff is advised that the Court is
required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or
officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a
complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally “frivolous or
malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief
from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). “Notwithstanding
any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any
time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). In this case, the Court has not yet screened the
complaint, and service on Defendants has not yet been authorized. Therefore, Plaintiff’s service on
Defendant Wilson was premature.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s request for default
judgment be DENIED.
These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge
assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen (14)
days after date of service of these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written
objections with the Court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's
Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the
specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, __ F.3d __, __,
No. 11-17911, 2014 WL 6435497, at *3 (9th Cir. Nov. 18, 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d
1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
December 13, 2014
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?