WOLFE v. DERRICK MARINE, INC. et al
LETTER-ORDER denying w/out prejudice 9 Motion for Default Judgment. Signed by Judge Esther Salas on 7/11/17. (DD, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
MARTIN LUTHER KING
50 WALNUT ST.
NEWARK, NJ 07101
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
July 11, 2017
Wolfe v. Derrick Marine, Inc., et al.
Civil Action No. 16-8026 (ES) (MAH)
On January 12, 2017, Plaintiff requested entry of default under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 55(a) by the Clerk of Court. (D.E. No. 4). But the Clerk of Court has not entered
default—which is a prerequisite for default judgment. See, e.g., Husain v. Casino Control
Comm’n, 265 F. App’x 130, 133 (3d Cir. 2008).
Having reviewed the executed summons returned in this case (D.E. No. 3), the Court
hereby orders Plaintiff to show cause how service of the Complaint and Summons meets the
requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4. In particular, Plaintiff must address the
propriety of: (1) naming Defendants’ purported counsel under the “Name and address of
Defendant” (see D.E. No. 3 at 1 (emphasis added)) and (2) effecting service “by mail through
U.S. Postal Service . . . by certified mail, return receipt requested” (see D.E. No. 3 at 2). Plaintiff
shall show cause by no later than 30 days from this Order by way of a letter to this Court filed on
the CM/ECF System.
As such, without the entry of default by the Clerk of Court, the Court must DENY
without prejudice the pending motion for default judgment. (D.E. No. 9). The Clerk of Court
shall terminate Docket Entry No. 9.
Esther Salas, U.S.D.J.
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?