From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lee v. Ho

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Aug 9, 2012
2:12-CV-884 JCM (GWF) (D. Nev. Aug. 9, 2012)

Opinion

2:12-CV-884 JCM (GWF)

08-09-2012

ROBIN M. LEE, Plaintiff, v. PETER HO, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Presently before the court is plaintiff Robin M. Lee's motion for entry of clerk's default. Doc. #11 (improperly filed as a motion for default judgment).

As the court explained in its two previous order denying default judgment, the record before this court does not reflect that any of the defendants have been served. As such, there is no basis for the entry of default judgment. The court warns plaintiff that if she continues down this path of intransigence, by refiling baseless motions for default without first filing executed summons establishing that defendants have been served, the court will issue sanctions, resulting in the possible dismissal of this case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff's motion for default judgment (doc. #11) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.

_______________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Lee v. Ho

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Aug 9, 2012
2:12-CV-884 JCM (GWF) (D. Nev. Aug. 9, 2012)
Case details for

Lee v. Ho

Case Details

Full title:ROBIN M. LEE, Plaintiff, v. PETER HO, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Aug 9, 2012

Citations

2:12-CV-884 JCM (GWF) (D. Nev. Aug. 9, 2012)