Opinion
Civil Action No. 04-2223-CM.
May 6, 2005
ORDER
Plaintiff filed the instant action on May 20, 2004. On April 7, 2005, Magistrate Judge O'Hara issued an order to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Plaintiff responded and, at the same time, moved for default judgment (Doc. 16).
Foremost, the court notes that the clerk has not yet entered default pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a). As such, this court cannot enter default judgment. In addition, while the court does not issue advisory opinions, the court feels compelled to inform plaintiff that, had plaintiff's motion been ripe for review, the court would have denied it due to the fact that plaintiff's complaint is so rambling and incoherent that the court is unclear as to what claims plaintiff asserts and what relief he seeks. The court makes these remarks because plaintiff filed on May 2, 2005, a Petition for Default Judgment (Doc. 18) and a Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 19), both of which are as rambling and incoherent as plaintiff's Complaint. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff's Petition for Default Judgment (Doc. 16) is denied.