Serrano

Serrano v. Washington County

Good Law
120 F. App'x 704
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 14, 2005No. 04-35066California410 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Roderick Serrano appeals pro se the district court’s judgment and other decisions against him in his action arising out of his former employment as a juvenile counselor with the Washington County Juvenile Services Department. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s dismissal and summary judgment. Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 815, 816 (9th Cir. 1994). We review for abuse of discretion the district court’s denial of a default judgment, Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471 (9th Cir.1986), and denial of relief from judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b), Casey v. Albertson’s, Inc., 362 F.3d 1254, 1257 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.

The magistrate judge did not abuse his discretion when he denied Serrano’s motion for judgment by default because Serrano did not serve defendants pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(c) and defendants’ timely filed a waiver of service pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(d). Defendants therefore were not in default at the time Serrano moved for a default judgment. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a)(1)(B) (requiring an answer within 60 days when service was pursuant to Rule 4(d)).

The district court properly granted summary…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.