Opinion
Case No. 2:11-CV-00212-KJD-CWH.
October 6, 2011
ORDER
Presently before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment (#21) filed on August 11, 2011. Defendants filed a response in opposition (#23). Plaintiff asserts that despite Defendants having been granted an extension they still had not filed their answer to his complaint. However, Defendants' Answer (#12) was filed on June 27, 2011. Furthermore, Plaintiff was aware of this because he filed a Rebuttal (#16) to the Answer. Therefore, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's motion for default. Plaintiff is warned that if he continues to unnecessarily multiply the proceedings with baseless motions and pleadings, the Court will sanction him, up to and including dismissal of his complaint.