United States District Court, D. Oregon
June 5, 2015
LAWRENCE STANFILL EL, Plaintiff,
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, OREGON DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
ANNA J. BROWN, District Judge.
On May 1, 2015, Plaintiff Lawrence Stanfill El ("Plaintiff") filed this action against the Oregon Department ofTransportation and the Oregon Department of Motor Vehicles (collectively, "Defendants"), alleging, among other things, that Defendants violated his constitutional right to travel without restriction, by falsifying his driving record. Although Plaintiff has yet to file proper returns of service, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on May 26, 2015. Plaintiffs response to Defendants' motion to dismiss is currently due on June 12, 2015, and his service papers are due on June 29, 2015.
On May 29, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for entry of default judgment against Defendants, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ("Rule") 55, alleging that default judgment should enter because Defendants failed to answer the complaint on or before June 1, 2015. Although Rule 12(a)(1)(A)(i) requires a defendant to answer a complaint within twenty-one days of service, a motion to dismiss suspends the twenty-one day deadline. See FED. R. CIV. P. 12(a)(4). Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs motion for entry of default judgment (ECF No. 8) as moot, in light of the timely-filed motion to dismiss. See, e.g., Nero v. lves, No. CV 14-00859-BRO, 2014 WL 3347529, at *1 n.2 (C.D. Cal. May 27, 2014) ("To the extent Plaintiff seeks to obtain a default judgment against Defendants pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 55 (see Docket No. 24), Plaintiffs request should be DENIED as moot in light ofDefendants' filing of the instant Motion to Dismiss."), report and recommendation adopted, 2014 WL 3347539, at *1 (C.D. Cal. July 7, 2014).
IT IS SO ORDERED.