Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-00392/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-00392-20/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LUIS MANUEL GARCES,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. GAMBOA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:21-cv-00392-JLT-EPG (PC)

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW 

CAUSE

(ECF No. 97). 

On January 4, 2023, the Court issued an order directing Plaintiff to show cause why 

sanctions should not issue for violating Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. (ECF No. 97). As the 

Court’s order explained, Plaintiff filed a request for entry of default against Defendants Gamboa, 

Babb, and Sanders that appeared to be without legal or evidentiary support. (Id. at 1). The Court 

directed Plaintiff to respond, in writing, within thirty days. (Id.) On January 20, 2023, Plaintiff 

filed a response. (ECF No. 109). 

Plaintiff’s response states that the November 10, 2022 answer filed by Defendants 

Camacho, Ibarra, Hubbard, Allison, Huerta, Gill, Argon, Ramadan, Boyd, Cathey, Hernandez, 

and Wolf quoted “Defendants,” and in doing so, “Defendants’ attorneys’ stated that the Third 

Amended Complaint has been answered by all Defendants including M. Gamboa, T. Sanders, and 

Babb” in an attempt to avoid having Defendants Gamboa, Sanders, and Babb actually answer the 

Case 1:21-cv-00392-JLT-EPG Document 116 Filed 02/21/23 Page 1 of 4
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

complaint. (ECF No. 109, p. 1). Further, Plaintiff states that this Court has found that the Third 

Amended Complaint (“TAC”) was answered on November 10, 2022, without any waiver of 

service having been filed. (Id. at 2). Accordingly, Plaintiff argues that the request for entry of 

default was not premature because the TAC was answered by all Defendants on November 10, 

2022. It was then discovered that Defendants Gamboa, Sanders, and Babb had not responded to 

the complaint. Further, no notice of waiver of service or request for extension of time was 

submitted to Plaintiff before or after the complaint was answered. (Id.) Plaintiff denies that 

Defendants served Plaintiff with notice of waiver or that Plaintiff ever received such notice from 

any other office or institution. (Id.) 

First, contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, this Court did not find that Plaintiff’s TAC was 

answered on November 10, 2022 by all Defendants1. Indeed, as the Court explained in its January 

4, 2023 order:

Defendants Gamboa, Babb, and Sanders are not in default. Defendants Gamboa, 

Babb, and Sanders were served with the summons and operative complaint 

through the Court’s EService pilot program for civil rights cases. (ECF No. 82). 

Defendants filed a notice of intent to waive service on December 6, 2022. (ECF 

No. 91). Accordingly, Defendants Gamboa, Babb, and Sanders are not required to 

return waivers of service until January 5, 2023.

(ECF No 97, p. 3). On January 5, 2023, the California Attorney General’s office filed a waiver of 

service of summons on behalf of Defendant Gamboa. (ECF No. 98). That same day, Defendants 

Babb and Sanders, making a special appearance, filed a motion for administrative relief that 

sought a fourteen-day extension of time to file service waivers. (ECF No. 99). On January 6, 

2023, the Court granted the request, but supplied the following relevant details:

As defendants acknowledge, the deadline for Defendants Gamboa, Sanders, and 

Babb to file a waiver of service of process is January 5, 2023. However, 

Defendants Babb and Sanders have not filed a waiver of service. Defense counsel 

states in a declaration in support of the motion that “[d]espite diligent efforts to 

contact Babb and Sanders, Defendants’ counsel has been unable to reach them or 

determine whether the Office of the Attorney General can represent them in this 

action.” 

1

Plaintiff’s operative complaint also states claims against Defendants Hernandez, Hubbard, Huerta, Cathey, Wolf, 

and Allison for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment and against Defendants Hernandez, Hubbard, 

Gill, Ibarra, Camacho, Argon, Ramadan, and Boyd for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in violation of 

the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 79; see also ECF Nos. 18 and 21).

Case 1:21-cv-00392-JLT-EPG Document 116 Filed 02/21/23 Page 2 of 4
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

3

It is also worth noting the Plaintiff filed a premature motion for entry of default on 

December 27, 2022. (ECF No. 94). The Court issued an order to show cause why 

sanctions should not issue against Plaintiff for filing such a motion before 

Defendants’ response was due, especially in light of previous warnings against 

such filings. (ECF No. 97). While Plaintiff’s request for default judgment was 

improper and untimely, the Court recognizes Plaintiff’s intention to seek default 

judgment to the extent Defendants fail to timely respond to Plaintiff’s complaint. 

With this background in mind, the Court will grant one final extension of 14 days 

for Defendants Babb and Sanders to file their waiver of service. If Defendants 

Babb and Sanders fail to do so, counsel for the Attorney General’s office, who 

filed the notice of intent to waive service and have requested this extension, shall 

file a report regarding their position on how the Court should proceed with 

personal service and/or default regarding Defendants Babb and Sanders.

(Id. at 1-2). On January 13, 2023, the California Attorney General’s office filed a waiver of 

service of summons on behalf of Defendant Babb. (ECF No. 105). On January 18, 2023, the 

California Attorney General’s office filed a waiver of service of summons on behalf of Defendant 

Sanders. (ECF No. 107). On February 3, 2023, Defendants Gamboa, Babb, and Sanders filed an 

answer to Plaintiff’s TAC. (ECF No. 113). Thus, Defendants Gamboa, Babb, and Sanders have 

timely responded to Plaintiff’s complaint, and the Court will issue findings and recommendations 

that Plaintiff’s request for default be denied consistent with that finding. 

In light of Plaintiff’s representation that he was unaware that Defendants Gamboa, 

Sanders, and Babb had filed a notice indicating their intent to waive service, the Court will 

discharge the order to show cause. The Court also notes that Defendants Babb and Sanders did 

not file a motion for administrative relief requesting an extension of time to return waivers of 

service until January 5, 2023—the day of the filing deadline. (See ECF No. 99).

However, as Defendants Gamboa, Sanders, and Babb timely answered Plaintiff’s Third 

Amended Complaint on February 3, 2023, any future request as to entry of default against any

Defendant2named in the operative complaint would be improper and without legal justification. 

In the event that Plaintiff files such a frivolous request, and in light of this warning and the 

previous warning issued by the presiding district judge (see e.g., ECF No. 84), the Court will 

strongly consider issuing sanctions, up to and including dismissal.

2 On November 7, 2022, District Judge Jennifer L. Thurtson issued an order denying Plaintiff’s renewed request for 

entry of default and default judgment against Defendants Allison, Ramadan, Cathey, Boyd, Camacho, Gamboa, 

Hernandez, Hubbard, Huerta, Ibarra, Argon, Gill, and Wolf. (ECF No. 84, p. 6-7). 

Case 1:21-cv-00392-JLT-EPG Document 116 Filed 02/21/23 Page 3 of 4
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

4

Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that the Court’s January 4, 2023 order directing 

Plaintiff to show cause (ECF No. 97) is DISCHARGED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 21, 2023 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:21-cv-00392-JLT-EPG Document 116 Filed 02/21/23 Page 4 of 4