Puckett v. Dyer

Opinion

10 11 JOSEPH PUCKETT DYER, Case No. 1:22-cv-00750-KES-HBK (PC)

12 Plaintiff, ORDER DISREGARDING PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR CLERK’S DEFAULT 13 v. (Doc. No. 32) 14 JERRY DYER, et al., CLERK TO STRIKE EXHIBIT CONTAINING 15 Defendants. PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMAITON 16 (Doc. No. 31 at 6-7) 17

19 On October 3, 2024, Plaintiff filed a form “Application for Entry of Default.” (Doc. No. 20 32). Plaintiff requests the Clerk to enter a default against all Defendants in this action, whom 21 Plaintiff claims failed to timely respond to his Complaint. (See generally Id.). Plaintiff Joseph 22 Puckett Dyer paid the filing fee and proceeds pro se on his civil complaint filed on June 21, 2022. 23 (Doc. No. 1). 24 A review of the docket reveals that on July 18, 2024, Plaintiff filed a pleading titled 25 “Affidavits.” The pleading contains a narrative seemingly unrelated to Plaintiff’s Complaint. It 26 includes Plaintiff’s various interactions with his neighbors and 911 operators from the Fresno 27 Police Department on unspecified dates, his opinions on the country, race, and jails, and police 28 officers. (See generally Doc. No. 31). At the end of the document Plaintiff writes in all capital 1 letters, “APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT AGAINST [ ] all Defendant’s [sic].” (Id.

2 at 5). Plaintiff attaches to the pleading a copy of a “Benefits Verification Letter” from the Social

3 Security Administration that contains Plaintiff’s personally identifiable information. (Doc. No.

4 31 at 6-7). The Benefits Verification Letter is of no relevance to the pleading or Plaintiff’s

5 Complaint and will be stricken.

7 Entry of default by the Clerk of Court is appropriate as to any party against whom a

8 judgment for affirmative relief is sought that has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided

9 by the F ederal Rules of Civil Procedure and where that failure is shown by affidavit or otherwise. 10 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). The entry of default by the Clerk is a prerequisite for an entry of 11 judgment upon that default. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b). Where no defendant has been served, a 12 request for entry of default is premature. See Black v. Waddle, 2017 WL 749025, at *1 (E.D. Cal. 13 Feb. 27, 2017). No default was entered by the Clerk in this case. See docket. 15 On November 13, 2023, the Court issued Findings and Recommendations to dismiss this 16 case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). (Doc. No. 26). Therein, the Court found 17 that Plaintiff had not filed successful proofs of service as to any of the eleven named Defendants 18 in this action despite being afforded multiple extensions of time. (Id.). See also Doc. Nos. 10 19 (order to show cause why court should not dismiss under Rule 4(m), 12 (order grating extension 20 of time to serve), 14 (order granting extension of time to serve), 18 (order to serve with warning), 21 20 (order granting one final extension to serve). Because no Defendant has been properly served, 22 no Defendant is required to respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint. Therefore, entry of default is 23 premature and the Clerk properly withheld entry of default in response to Plaintiff’s Application 24 for Entry of Default. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). 25 With respect to Plaintiff’s July 18, 2024 pleading, it fails to state with particularity any 26 grounds for seeking relief, as required by Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See 27 Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b)(1)(B) (requiring a motion to the Court to “state with particularity the grounds 28 for seeking the order.”). The pleading instead recounts various incidents with no obvious 1 | connection to the underlying claims in this case and includes non sequiturs that cannot be 2 | plausibly construed as setting forth a basis for granting the requested relief. To the extent 3 | Plaintiff's July 18, 2024 pleading seeks entry of default against one or more Defendants in this 4 | action, the request is premature for the same reasons above. 5 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 6 1. The Clerk properly DISREGARDED Plaintiff's Application for Entry of Clerk’s 7 Default (Doc. No. 32). 8 2. The Clerk shall strike the “Benefits Verification Letter” from the Social Security 9 Administration that contains Plaintiff's personally identifiable information (Doc. No. 10 31 at 6-7) from the docket. 11 '? | Dated: _ October 4, 2024 Wiha Th fares Zack 13 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA 4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28