Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00056/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00056-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARK A. McFADZEAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

HARLEY G. LAPPIN, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:05-cv-00056-LJO-GSA PC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT AGAINST

DEFENDANT MOORHEAD

(Doc. 55)

Plaintiff Mark A. McFadzean (“plaintiff”) is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this

civil action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403

U.S. 388 (1971), which provides a remedy for violation of civil rights by federal actors. On

December 27, 2007, plaintiff filed a motion seeking entry of default against defendant Moorhead

(“defendant”). (Doc. 55.) Defendant opposed the motion on January 31, 2008, and plaintiff replied

on February 25, 2008. (Docs. 68, 70.)

Entry of default is appropriate as to any party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief

is sought that has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure and where that fact is made to appear by affidavit or otherwise. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). In

this instance, the record does not support plaintiff’s contention that defendant is in default. 

Plaintiff is incorrect that the United States Marshal served defendant on May 18, 2007. On

that date, the court issued an order directing the Marshal to initiate service of process on defendants.

(Doc. 26.) Pursuant to the waiver of service of summons, defendant had sixty days from December

5, 2007, within which to file a response to plaintiff’s second amended complaint. (Doc. 64.)

Case 1:05-cv-00056-DCB Document 72 Filed 02/27/08 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

Because the sixtieth day fell on a Sunday, the deadline for a response was Monday, February 4, 2008.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a). Further, the Federal Rules provide an additional three days for service by mail,

which extended the deadline to February 7, 2008. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(e). Defendant filed a timely

answer on January 22, 2008, and is not in default. (Doc. 65.)

Based on the foregoing, plaintiff’s motion for the entry of default against defendant

Moorhead is HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February 27, 2008 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

60kij UNI 8 TED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00056-DCB Document 72 Filed 02/27/08 Page 2 of 2