Bird v. Mayhew, et al.

Filing 16

ORDER Directing Defendant Mayhew to File a Response to 10 Plaintiff's Request for Entry of Default, Filed March 23, 2015, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 4/20/15. Fifteen-Day Deadline. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MICHAEL BIRD,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
DONALD MAYHUE, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18
19
20
21

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:15-cv-00298-LJO-SAB (PC)
ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT MAYHEW
TO FILE A RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT, FILED
MARCH 23, 2015
[ECF No. 10]

Plaintiff Michael Bird is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On February 25, 2015, the instant action was removed from the California Superior Court for
the County of Madera by Defendant D. Mayhew.
On March 23, 2015, Plaintiff filed a request for entry of default as to Defendant Mayhew

22

pursuant to Rules 55 and 81 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (ECF No. 10). Rule 81(c)

23

provides that a defendant who did not answer before removal must answer or present other defenses or

24

objections within the longest of these periods:

25
26
27
28

(A) 21 days after receiving—through service or otherwise—a copy of the initial pleading
stating the claim for relief;
(B) 21 days after being served with the summons for an initial pleading on file at the
of service;
1

time

(C) 7 days after the notice of removal is filed.

1
2

Fed. R. Civ. P. 81(c)(2)(A)-(C).
Defendant Mayhew received notice of Plaintiff’s request for entry of default by way of the

3
4

Court’s electronic case filing system on March 24, 2015. Under Local Rule 230(l), “[o]pposition, if

5

any, to the granting of the motion shall be served and filed by the responding party not more than

6

twenty-one (21) days after the date of service of the motion. A responding party who has no

7

opposition to the granting of the motion shall serve and file a statement to that effect, specifically

8

designating the motion in question. Failure of the responding party to file an opposition or to file a

9

statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion

10

and may result in the imposition of sanctions.” See E.D. Cal. Local Rule 230(l).
On April 10, 2015, Defendants Curtice, Montoya, Roberts and the California Department of

11
12

Corrections and Rehabilitation filed a joinder in Defendant Mayhew’s notice of removal, and request

13

they be granted thirty (30) days after the screening order to file a responsive pleading to Plaintiff’s

14

complaint. (ECF No. 14.) Despite the April 10, 2015, filing, Defendant Mayhew has not filed an

15

opposition or statement of no opposition to Plaintiff’s request for entry of default within the twenty-

16

one day time frame, and the Court shall direct Defendant Mayhew to do so in compliance with Local

17

Rule 230(l).
Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that within fifteen (15) days from the date

18
19

of service of this order, Defendant Mayhew shall file an opposition or statement of no opposition to

20

Plaintiff’s request for entry of default, filed March 23, 2015.

21
22

IT IS SO ORDERED.

23

Dated:

24

April 20, 2015
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

25
26
27
28
2