Opinion
Civil Action 2:09-cv-00631.
March 1, 2010
Order
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff Charles M. Steele's October 15, 2009 objection (doc. 20) to the Magistrate Judge's October 6, 2009 Report and Recommendation that recommended plaintiff's September 23, 2009 motion for default judgment (doc. 15) and October 5, 2009 motion to strike defendants' answer (doc. 16) be denied.
Plaintiff objects to the Magistrate Judge's failure to rule on his request that defendant file a more definite statement. Rule 12(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that "[a] party may move for a more definite statement of a pleading to which a responsive pleading is allowed but which is so vague or ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably prepare a response." Fed.R.Civ.P 12(e) (Emphasis added). An answer that contains a counter-claim, a cross-claim, or a third-party claim is subject to a Rule 12(e) motion. Defendants' answer, however, does not contain a claim for relief and is not subject to Rule 12(e) as a result.
Plaintiff's Charles M. Steele's October 15, 2009 objection to the Magistrate Judge's October 6, 2009 Report and Recommendation (doc. 20) is OVERRULED.