Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00730/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00730-7/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DESMON LOEB,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0730 LKK PAN P

vs.

T. FELKER, et al.,

Defendants ORDER

 /

On January 3, 2006, plaintiff filed a request that the Clerk of the Court enter the

default of defendants T. Felker’s and A. Martin’s. He asserts these defendants failed timely to

plead in response to the complaint. 

A party who waives service of process must respond to the complaint within 60

days from the date the request for waiver was sent. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(3). When a party against

whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend as

provided by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and that fact is made to appear by affidavit or

otherwise, the clerk shall enter the party’s default. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). 

The court may set aside entry of default upon a showing of good cause. Fed. R.

Civ. P. 55(c). Good causes exists where the default did not result from culpable conduct or

where the defendant has a meritorious defense. Franchise Holding II, LLC. V. Huntington 

Case 2:04-cv-00730-LKK -EFB Document 50 Filed 04/26/06 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

2

Restaurants, 375 F.3d 922, 925-26 (9th Cir. 2004). Where a party timely seeks relief from a

default and has a meritorious defense, default should be set aside. Mendoza v. Wight Vineyard

Management, 783 F.2d 941, 945-46 (9th Cir. 1986).

On October 13, 2005, defendants T. Felker and A. Martin conceded and explained

their default, and they answered the complaint. They assert counsel did not calendar time for

responding to the complaint because counsel already had answered on behalf of the other

defendants and did not realize she had failed to respond until she received plaintiff’s request for

entry of default. 

There is no evidence that these defendants intentionally failed to respond so as to

gain unfair advantage in the litigation. Counsel promptly explained the default and answered

upon realizing the error.

The Clerk of the Court has not entered defendants’ default and defendants have shown

good cause.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s January 3, 2006, motion

for default judgment is denied and the Clerk of the Court shall not enter defendants’ default.

DATED: April 24, 2006.

\004\loeb0730.dny dflt (jfm)

Case 2:04-cv-00730-LKK -EFB Document 50 Filed 04/26/06 Page 2 of 2