Rodgers v. Waste Industries Incorporation

Filing 11

ORDER denying 10 Motion for Entry of Default - Signed by Julie A. Richards, Clerk of Court on 02/12/2013. (Baker, C.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
EASTERN DIVISION
No. 4:12-CV-294-FL
TORRICK JOHNTRELLE RODGERS ,
Plaintiff,
v.

)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

WASTE INDUSTRIES INCORPORATION, )
)
Defendant.
)
On February 11, 2013 , Torrick Johntrelle Rodgers ("plaintiff'), proceeding without counsel,
sent a document to the court alleging that Waste Industries ("defendant") was allowed twenty-one
days to respond to his claim and had failed to do so [D.E. 9]. Plaintiff asks the court "to grant the
next appropriate step in this matter." The undersigned liberally construes plaintiffs filing as a
motion for entry of default under Rule 55( a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Erickson
v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007); Hill v. Braxton, 277 F.3d 701 , 707 (4th Cir. 2002). Rule 55(a)
provides for entry of default against a party who "has failed to plead or otherwise defend." See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 55(a).
Plaintiffs complaint is pending frivolity review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Accordingly,
defendant has not been served with summons or the complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c). Therefore,
the deadline for defendant to answer or respond to plaintiffs complaint has not expired. See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 12(a)(2). Plaintiffs motion for entry of default is premature and is thus DENIED [D.E.

9] .
SO ORDERED. This

\~ay of February 2013 .