Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06148/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06148-3/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SHADID AL-BARR aka

DWAYNE X. HARMON,

Plaintiff,

v.

GAIL LEWIS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:03-CV-6148-REC-SMS-P

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

(Doc. 47) 

Plaintiff Shadid Al-Barr aka Dwayne X. Harmon (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding

pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 20,

2005, plaintiff filed a motion seeking the entry of default against defendants for failing to respond

to his complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55.

Plaintiff is not entitled to entry of default. Defendants’ decisions to file two motions to

dismiss rather than answer the complaint are acceptable responses and preclude default. Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12(a)(4). Once the motions were filed, a further response to the complaint was due only after the

court ruled on the motions. On October 12, 2005, the court denied defendants’ most recent motion

to dismiss. Doc. 45. Pursuant to Rule 12, defendants’ responsive pleading is due on October 26,

2005, unless a different time is fixed by the court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a), 12(a)(4)(A). In this instance,

pursuant to the court’s order of October 19, 2005, defendants have until November 18, 2005 to file

a response to plaintiff’s complaint. Doc. 46; Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a). Even if the court had not fixed

///

Case 1:03-cv-06148-LJO -SMS Document 48 Filed 10/26/05 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

a different time as it did, plaintiff’s motion would have been premature in light of the fact that under

Rule 12, defendants’ response was not due until October 26.

For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff is not entitled to entry of default against defendants and

his motion is HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 26, 2005 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-06148-LJO -SMS Document 48 Filed 10/26/05 Page 2 of 2