Van Hope-el v. U.S. Department of State, et al.

Filing 18

ORDER DENYING 13 the Entry of Default; ORDER TERMINATING 14 the Motion for Default Judgment as Moot, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 7/28/2018. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOUDON VAN HOPE-EL,
Plaintiff,

12
13

v.

14

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:18-cv-0441 - DAD - JLT
ORDER DENYING THE ENTRY OF DEFAULT
(Doc. 13)
ORDER TERMINATING THE MOTION FOR
DEFAULT JUDGMENT AS MOOT
(Doc. 14)

On July 19, 2018, Plaintiff filed an application for the entry of default against the United States

18

Department of State. (Doc. 13) Significantly, however, Plaintiff has not filed a proof of service that

19

demonstrate his compliance with the service requirements of Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil

20

Procedure. To serve the United States and its agencies, officers, or employees, a party must:

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

(A)(i) deliver a copy of the summons and of the complaint to the United States attorney
for the district where the action is brought—or to an assistant United States attorney or
clerical employee whom the United States attorney designates in a writing filed with the
court clerk—or
(ii) send a copy of each by registered or certified mail to the civil-process clerk at the
United States attorney’s office;
(B) send a copy of each by registered or certified mail to the Attorney General of the
United States at Washington, D.C.; and
(C) if the action challenges an order of a nonparty agency or officer of the United States,
send a copy of each by registered or certified mail to the agency or officer.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i) (emphasis added).
1

1

The “Affidavit of Service” filed by Plaintiff indicates that he hired a process server who

2

indicated he “served [the] U.S. Department of State … by serving Christine Heifferson, Paralegal,

3

authorized to accept service.” (Doc. 8 at 2) This affidavit does not indicate that Plaintiff “deliver[ed] a

4

copy of the summons and of the complaint to the United States attorney for the district where the

5

action is brought” or mailed “a copy of each by registered or certified mail to the Attorney General of

6

the United States at Washington, D.C.,” as required by Rule 4(i) of the Federal Rules. Thus, service

7

has not been properly effected and the entry of default is not appropriate. See Duckworth v. Dep’t of

8

Navy, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 21168 (9th Cir. Sept. 10, 1992) (observing the plaintiff “failed to deliver

9

a copy of the summons and complaint to the United States Attorney for the Central District of

10

California, where the action was originally brought” and denying default judgment “[b]ecause the

11

government was not properly served”)

12

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS:

13

1.

Plaintiff’s request for the entry of default by the Clerk of Court (Doc. 13) is DENIED;

14

2.

Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment (Doc. 14) is terminated as UNRIPE.

15
16
17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

July 28, 2018

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2