Su v. Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center & POM
Filing
20
ORDER DENYING 19 Request for Action filed by Dantao Su. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 5/6/2011. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/6/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
SAN JOSE DIVISION
NO. C 10-04194 EJD
DANTAO SU,
11
Plaintiff(s),
ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR
ACTION
v.
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
13
DEFENSE LANGUAGE INSTITUTE
FOREIGN LANGUAGE CENTER, ET AL.,
14
[RE: Docket Item No. 19]
Defendant(s).
/
15
16
Presently before the Court is Plaintiff’s Request for Action. (Docket Item No. 19.) Plaintiff
17
requests 1) that the Court remove or amend the Reassignment Order dated April 25, 2011, and 2)
18
that default and default judgment be entered against Defendant. (Id. at 4.)
19
The Court’s April 25, 2011 Order Reassigning this case from the Honorable James Ware to
20
the Honorable Edward J. Davila remains undisturbed. This matter shall remain venued in the
21
current department for all future purposes. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request is DENIED.
22
The Court finds no legal basis to grant the request for default and refers Plaintiff to the
23
Court’s previous Order dated April 20, 2011 (hereinafter, “Previous Order,” Docket Item No. 14) in
24
which the Court extended the deadline for service for ninety (90) days. Upon review of the docket,
25
it appears that Defendant has not yet been served by the U.S. Marshal. As explained in the Previous
26
Order, the Court can not take any action against a defendant who has not been properly served under
27
///
28
///
1
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request for default and default judgment
2
is DENIED.
3
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6
7
8
9
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Dated: May 6, 2011
EDWARD J. DAVILA
United States District 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?