Lee v. Ho et al

Filing 36

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 26 Motion for Default Judgment and 28 Motion of Objection to 27 Order. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 2/25/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
7
8

ROBIN M. LEE,

9
10
11

2:12-CV-884 JCM (GWF)

Plaintiff(s),
v.
PETER HO, et al.,

12
Defendant(s).

13
14

ORDER

15

Presently before the court is the matter of Lee v. Ho, et al., case no. 2:12-cv-884-JCM-GWF.

16

Acting pro se, plaintiff Robin M. Lee has filed the instant motion of objection (doc. # 28) and

17

motion for an order of default judgment (doc. # 26).

18

On September 27, 2013, this court entered an order denying plaintiff’s motion for leave to

19

amend. (Doc. # 27). In that order, the court again reiterated that the complaint had been dismissed

20

without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). (Id.). The court notified plaintiff for the seventh

21

time that the docket does not reflect that the defendants have been served. (Id.). The court again

22

denies plaintiff’s motion for default judgment (doc. # 26) for this reason.

23

With respect to his objections (doc. # 28), plaintiff has provided no legitimate basis on which

24

this court may overrule its prior order (doc. # 27). In fact, plaintiff’s objections are largely

25

incoherent, and the court cannot discern what, specifically, plaintiff is even objecting to.

26

...

27

...

28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

1

Accordingly,

2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that plaintiff’s motion for an

3
4
5
6

order of default judgment (doc. # 26) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion of objection (doc. # 28) be, and the same
hereby is, DENIED.
DATED February 25, 2014.

7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-