Bonilla v. Clay

District Court, N.D. California·Decided December 19, 2019·No. 3:19-cv-07708·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEVEN WAYNE BONILLA, Case No. 19-cv-07708-VC (PR) Petitioner, ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH v. PREJUDICE CLARANCE DON CLAY, et al., Respondents. Plaintiff Steven Wayne Bonilla, a state inmate, has filed a document entitled, “statutory default judgment” seeking default judgments against a list of hundreds of government employees, private individuals and businesses. The clerk of the court has incorrectly labelled this document a petition for a writ of mandamus. Under Rule 55 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, judgment by default may be entered “[w]hen a party against whom affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Rule 55(b)(2) provides that the court may grant a default judgment after default has been entered by the Clerk of the Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2). Default judgments are generally disfavored, and “[c]ases should be decided upon their merits whenever reasonably possible.” Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472 (9th Cir. 1986). Bonilla seeks default judgments because the named individuals and businesses “failed to perform their statutory duty” in his criminal case many years ago. Because these individuals and businesses have not been served with a complaint, affirmative relief against them has not been sought; therefore, default judgments are unavailable. Furthermore, any claim having to do with Bonilla’s criminal proceedings should be filed in his pending habeas petition where he is represented by counsel. This is not a case in which the undersigned judge’s impartiality might be reasonably questioned. See United States v. Holland, 519 F.3d 909, 912 (9th Cir. 2008) (absent legitimate reason to recuse himself or herself, judge has a duty to sit in judgment in all cases assigned to that judge). The Clerk shall close the case. The Clerk shall return, without filing, any further documents Bonilla submits after this case is closed.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: December 19, 2019 LO. wae VINCE CHHABRIA United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bonilla v. Clay, (N.D. Cal. 2019).

Bonilla v. Clay (Bonilla v. Clay) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gary R. Eitel v. William D. McCool
782 F.2d 1470 (Ninth Circuit, 1986)
United States v. Holland
519 F.3d 909 (Ninth Circuit, 2008)