Court Opinion

ID: 9380698
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-21 00:00:25.266324+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:26.800583
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-40190         Document: 00516682576             Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/20/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                                                     United States Court of Appeals
                                                                              Fifth Circuit

                                                                            FILED
                                       No. 22-40190                    March 20, 2023
                                     Summary Calendar
                                                                       Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                            Clerk
   Randall T. Greenough,

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellant,

                                             versus

   Sharilla Gray,

                                                                   Defendant—Appellee.

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the Eastern District of Texas
                                USDC No. 9:21-CV-75

   Before Wiener, Elrod, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          Randall T. Greenough, an inmate confined at the Polunsky Unit of the
   Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division,
   appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for default judgment and
   dismissal of his complaint for failure to state a claim, under Federal Rule of
   Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-40190       Document: 00516682576          Page: 2    Date Filed: 03/20/2023

                                     No. 22-40190

            We review a district court’s denial of entry of default judgment for
   abuse of discretion. Lewis v. Lynn, 236 F.3d 766, 767 (5th Cir. 2001); see Trout
   Point Lodge, Ltd. v. Handshoe, 729 F.3d 481, 491 (5th Cir. 2013). We review
   a district court’s order on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim de
   novo. Christiana Tr. v. Riddle, 911 F.3d 799, 802 (5th Cir. 2018). Greenough
   argues that he is entitled to entry of default judgment because Gray filed her
   answer out of time—forty-one days after the district court issued an order to
   answer or otherwise plead to the plaintiff’s complaint, rather than the
   required forty. However, as the district court correctly found, Gray did
   comply with the order. She timely filed a motion to dismiss forty days after
   the order to answer was sent. See FED. R. CIV. P. 5(b)(2)(E) (service
   complete when filed or sent by electronic means, unless filer or sender learns
   that it did not reach the person to be served). The district court did not err
   in denying Greenough’s motion for entry of default judgment.
            Greenough’s brief fails to raise any argument challenging the district
   court’s dismissal of his complaint for failure to state a claim. He has therefore
   abandoned any challenge to the district court’s dismissal. Sissom v. Univ. of
   Texas High Sch., 927 F.3d 343, 349 (5th Cir. 2019) (citing Yohey v. Collins, 985
   F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993) (Although we liberally construe the briefs of pro
   se appellants, even pro se appellants must brief their arguments to preserve
   them).
            Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. It is
   ordered that Appellant’s related motions for judicial notice are DENIED.

                                          2