Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-00366/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-00366-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 470
Nature of Suit: Civil (Rico)
Cause of Action: 18:1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act

---

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 Clerk entered default against Mrs. Locke on September 17, 2007. She has never

appeared in this action.

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Richard Walker,

Plaintiff,

v.

Robert J. Locke, Lisa Heckendorn Vollmer

Locke,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CV-07-366-PHX-JAT

ORDER

Plaintiff has filed a Motion to Strike Answer, for Entry of Default Against Defendant

Robert J. Locke, and For an Order to Show Cause Why a Default Judgment Should not be

Entered Against Defendants (Doc. #42). The Court now rules on the Motion. 

Plaintiff has moved pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(d) to strike

Defendant Robert J. Locke’s Answer for failure to appear at his deposition, failure to answer

discovery requests, and general failure to communicate with Plaintiff’s counsel. Since his

counsel left the case, Mr. Locke has not responded to any of Plaintiff’s inquiries. Nor did

Mr. Locke submit his portion of the Proposed Final Pretrial Order as required by this Court1

.

Because of Mr. Locke’s failure to participate in the litigation, Plaintiff has asked for an entry

of default against him.

Mr. Locke has failed to appear or otherwise defend himself in this case for months,

including not appearing for his scheduled deposition without any explanation. He has also

Case 2:07-cv-00366-JAT Document 43 Filed 02/04/09 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 -

disobeyed a Court order to participate in the filing of a Proposed Final Pretrial Order. The

Court therefore will strike his Answer at Docket Number 7 and direct the Clerk to enter

default against him. 

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED GRANTING Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Answer, for

Entry of Default Against Defendant Robert J. Locke, and For an Order to Show Cause Why

a Default Judgment Should not be Entered Against Defendants (Doc. #42).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED striking Defendant Robert J. Locke’s Answer (Doc. #7).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter Default against

Defendant Robert J. Locke.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 15 days of receiving this Order, Plaintiff

shall file a properly-supported Rule 55(b) motion for default judgment against both

Defendants. The motion shall include a proposed amount of damages; and Plaintiff shall

attach to the motion a Proposed Form of Default Judgment.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall appear before this Court at 11:00

a.m. on Monday, April 27, 2009 for a hearing. At the hearing, Defendants shall appear and

show cause why Default Judgment should not be entered against them and/or to dispute the

amount of damages claimed by Plaintiff. Plaintiff shall present evidence to support his

requested damages.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating the Final Pretrial Conference currently set for

February 17, 2009. 

DATED this 3rd day of February, 2009.

Case 2:07-cv-00366-JAT Document 43 Filed 02/04/09 Page 2 of 2