Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00670/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00670-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 443
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Accommodations
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

The above-titled action was reassigned to the undersigned on June 15, 2005.

2

Because April 24, 2005, the twentieth day after service, was a Sunday, defendants

were entitled to file their answer on April 25, 2005. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a) (providing

where last day to file document is a Sunday, time to file is extended to following Monday).

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JACQUELINE JOHNSON,

Plaintiff,

 v.

VIJAY and JAMES J. PRASAD,

Defendants /

No. C-05-0670 MMC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF

DEFAULT; DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO STRIKE ANSWER AND

ENTER DEFAULT; DIRECTING CLERK

TO FILE SECOND AMENDED

COMPLAINT 

Before the Court are plaintiff’s application for entry of default, filed April 18, 2005,

and plaintiff’s motion to strike defendants’ answer and enter default, filed May 11, 2005.1

Having reviewed plaintiff’s application and motion, as well as the file of the instant matter,

the Court hereby RULES as follows:

1. Plaintiff’s request, made in both her application and motion, for entry of

defendants’ default is hereby DENIED, for the reason that defendants’ answer is timely,

having been filed on April 25, 2005, within 20 days of April 4, 2005, the date plaintiff served

defendants with the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)

(providing answer must be filed within 20 days of service of pleading).2

Case 3:05-cv-00670-MMC Document 23 Filed 06/16/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

2. Plaintiff’s motion to strike defendants’ answer, on the ground defendants did not

personally sign the answer, is hereby DENIED because the answer is signed by

defendants’ counsel of record. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a) (providing every pleading “shall

be signed by at least one attorney of record . . . or, if the party is not represented by an

attorney, shall be signed by the party”).

3. Although plaintiff has neither sought leave to file her SAC nor submitted a

stipulation between the parties allowing for the filing of the SAC, because defendants have

filed an answer to the SAC and have not challenged the propriety of the filing of the SAC,

the Court hereby DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to file the SAC, which pleading shall be

the operative complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 16, 2005 /s/ Maxine M. Chesney 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-00670-MMC Document 23 Filed 06/16/05 Page 2 of 2