Austin v. Lyft, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GEORGE JARVIS AUSTIN,

Case No. 21-cv-09345-JCS Plaintiff, 8 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

LYFT, INC., SHOULD NOT BE DENIED

10 Defendant. Re: Dkt. No. 18

12 Plaintiff brings a Motion for Default Judgment (“Motion”), which the Court finds to be defective in the following respects: 1) the Clerk’s Office has not entered Defendant’s default pursuant to Rule 55(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which is a prerequisite for bringing a motion for default judgment under Rule 55(b) – any application for entry of default should be made to the Clerk’s Office; and 2) to the extent the Motion may be seeking entry of default under Rule 55(a) rather than default judgment under Rule 55(b), the request is premature because the time for Defendant to respond has not yet passed, as is conceded in the Motion. See Motion at 4 (“The deadline for Defendant to respond will…