Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00434/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00434-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Kenneth A. Bocchini
Defendant
Susan L. Bocchini
Defendant
Jose Escobedo
Plaintiff
Safwan Hussain
Defendant
Primo Mini Mart
Defendant

Document Text:

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

JOSE ESCOBEDO, 

Plaintiff,

v.

SAFWAN HUSSAIN, dba Primo Mini 

Mart; KENNETH A. BOCCHINI, Trustee 

of the Kenneth A. and Susan L. Bocchini 

Family Trust; and Susan L. BOCCHINI, 

Trustee of the Kenneth A. and Susan L. 

Bocchini Family Trust,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:15-cv-434 --- BAM

ORDER CONSTRUING DEFENDANTS’ 

FILINGS AS AN ANSWER TO THE 

COMPLAINT

(Docs. 8, 11)

On March 19, 2015, Plaintiff filed a complaint seeking relief pursuant to the Americans 

with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), et al., against Defendants Kenneth Bocchini and Susan Bocchini

(“Bocchini Defendants”) as the operators of a business located in Fresno, California (“the 

Property”).

1

(Doc. 1). On March 31, 2015, Plaintiff filed a return of service, titled Summons 

Returned Executed, documenting that the Bocchini Defendants were properly served with the 

Summons and Complaint. (Docs. 4, 5). Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a), the 

Bocchini Defendants were required to file a responsive pleading on or before April 20, 2015. 

 

1

Plaintiff also names Safwan Hussain as a defendant. Mr. Hussain has not made an appearance and on May 

22, 2015, the Clerk entered default as to Safwan Hussain.

Case 1:15-cv-00434-BAM Document 16 Filed 05/22/15 Page 1 of 3
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

Shortly after Defendants were served, Defendants, appearing pro se, filed an application 

for a stay with an attached letter to the Court responding to the allegations in Plaintiff’s 

Complaint. (Doc. 8). In that letter, Defendants explained that they have made several 

modifications to the property and that the changes render the property ADA compliant.2 

Defendants also stated that they “are looking forward to seeing Jose Escobedo in Court.” (Doc. 8 

at 3). In a second letter filed with the Court on May 15, 2015, Defendants explain that additional 

ADA modifications have been made at the Property in response to Plaintiff’s Complaint. (Doc. 

11). The Bocchini Defendants again expressed that they “are looking forward to meeting with 

Mr. Escobar [sic] to discuss a resolution.” (Doc. 11). 

By filing several letters with the Court responding to the allegations in Plaintiff’s 

complaint, the Court finds that Defendants have sufficiently indicated their intent to defend 

against this action. Defendants are without counsel and the Court recognizes that it must be 

“sensitive to the challenges faced by pro se litigants unfamiliar with the judicial process.” See 

Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept., 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988), overruled in part on other 

grounds by Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). Accordingly, in the interest of 

justice, the Court construes Defendants’ letters filed on April 28, 2015 and May 20, 2015 as an 

answer or otherwise responsive pleading to Plaintiff’s Complaint. See Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 

1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir.1986) (“Cases should be decided upon their merits whenever reasonably 

possible.”).3 

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 

1. Kenneth and Susan Bocchini’s documents filed on April 28, 2015 and May 18, 

2015 are construed as an ANSWER to the Complaint. (Docs. 8, 11). 

 

2 On May 7, 2015, the Court denied Defendants’ Application to Stay. (Doc. 9).

3 Although Defendants initial responsive pleading was filed after the answer deadline, an eight-day delay in 

filing an answer does not merit entry of default. 

Case 1:15-cv-00434-BAM Document 16 Filed 05/22/15 Page 2 of 3
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

3

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve this order on Defendants via United 

States mail at the following address:

Kenneth and Susan Bocchini

2208 Mesa Verde Drive

Milpitas, California

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 22, 2015 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00434-BAM Document 16 Filed 05/22/15 Page 3 of 3