Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04565/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04565-1/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

A return of service from the United States Marshal’s Service was filed in this case on

May 12, 2006, documenting that personal service was effected on San Jose Police Department 

Defendants by serving the summonses on San Jose Police Officer Bill Gonzalez, #2286, and on

to the San Jose City Attorney on Deputy City Clerk Ann C. Stults, as set forth in the order of

service. See, docket no. 8. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEVEN J. FLORES, 

Plaintiff(s),

 v.

SAN JOSE POLICE DEP'T, et al.,

Defendant(s). 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 05-4565 TEH (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

WHY DEFAULT JUDGMENT

SHOULD NOT BE ENTERED

AGAINST DEFENDANTS;

INSTRUCTIONS TO CLERK

Plaintiff, a prisoner at the California Medical Facility in Vacaville,

California, filed a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging

that San Jose police officers Santos, Gannon, Murphy and Boren used excessive

force in the course of arresting him on October 7, 2004 . 

On March 3, 2006, the Court found the complaint stated cognizable claims

against these Defendants and directed the United States Marshal to serve the

complaint on them. On April 19, 2006, Defendants were personally served with

the summons and complaint, as was the Office of the San Jose City Attorney.1

The Court’s Order of March 3, 2006 also directed Defendants to file, within 60

days, a motion for summary judgment or other dispositive motion, or, in the

alternative, to advise the Court within such time period that Defendants are of the

Case 3:05-cv-04565-TEH Document 11 Filed 05/16/07 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

opinion that the case cannot be resolved by dispositive motion. 

More than 60 days have passed and Defendants have not filed a

dispositive motion or sought an extension of time to do so, nor have Defendants

communicated with the Court in any manner. Defendants have made no

appearance in the action. Accordingly, Defendants are hereby ordered to show

cause within 30 days of the date this order is filed why a default judgment should

not be entered against them on Plaintiff’s claims.

The Clerk shall serve a copy of this order on each of the Defendants at the

San Jose Police Department and on the San Jose City Attorney’s office at the

addresses listed in docket number 8, as well as on Plaintiff. The Clerk shall also

mail a courtesy copy of this order to Police Officer Bill Gonzalez, #2286 at the

San Jose Police Department, and to Deputy City Clerk Ann C. Stults at the San

Jose City Attorney’s Office. 

SO ORDERED.

DATED: 05/14/07 THELTON E. HENDERSON

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-04565-TEH Document 11 Filed 05/16/07 Page 2 of 2