Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00564/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00564-2/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff James Cato, Jr. is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

This action is proceeding on Plaintiff’s claim of retaliation against Defendant Dumont. 

Despite being served with process on August 22, 2014, Defendant Dumont has not filed a 

response to Plaintiff’s complaint. (ECF No. 16.) 

Rule 55(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that the Clerk of the Court enter 

default “when a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or 

otherwise defend, and that failure is shown by affidavit or otherwise.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). 

///

///

///

///

JAMES CATO, JR.,

 Plaintiff,

v.

J. A. DUMONT, et al.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-00564-LJO-SAB (PC)

ORDER AS TO WHY ENTRY OF DEFAULT 

SHOULD NOT BE ENTERED AS TO 

DEFENDANT DUMONT

[ECF No. 16]

Case 1:14-cv-00564-LJO-SAB Document 17 Filed 01/09/15 Page 1 of 2
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

On this record it appears that entry of default is appropriate. Accordingly, within thirty (30) 

days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall indicate whether entry of default as to 

Defendant Dumont is appropriate. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 9, 2015 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00564-LJO-SAB Document 17 Filed 01/09/15 Page 2 of 2