United States District Court, D. Massachusetts
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
H. HENNESSY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
matter was assigned to me on May 21, 2018 for all pretrial
and non-dispositive matters and Report and Recommendations.
Dkt. no. 2. Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff's
motion for entry of default against Defendant Linda M. Rogers
(“Linda Rogers”). Dkt. no. 10.
consideration of the foregoing and for the reasons that
follow, I RECOMMEND Plaintiff's motion for entry of
default be GRANTED.
commenced this action to enforce a federal tax lien by filing
a complaint on May 18, 2018. Dkt. no. 1. Linda Rogers was
served with a summons and a copy of the complaint on July 10,
2018. Dkt. no. 9. Linda Rogers has not answered or otherwise
moved with respect to the complaint. On October 10, 2018,
Plaintiff filed a request for entry of default against Linda
Rogers. Dkt. no. 10. Plaintiff filed its request as a motion
for entry of default. Id. Because Plaintiff docketed
its request as a motion, rather than simply a request for the
clerk to enter a default, the Court is proceeding pursuant to
a Report and Recommendation.
a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is
sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend, and that
failure is shown by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk must
enter the party's default.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(a). As
a preliminary matter, a default cannot be entered against a
party unless the court has both personal and subject matter
jurisdiction over the parties against whom the judgment is
sought. Sergentakis v. Channell, 16-11101-DHH, 2017
WL 129989, at *1 (D. Mass. Jan. 12, 2017).
the nature of the instant matter involves the enforcement of
a federal tax lien by the United States of America, this
Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1331, 1340, and 1345, and 26 U.S.C. §§
7402 and 7403. The record before the Court indicates that on
July 10, 2018 Linda Rogers was personally served, in hand,
with a summons and a copy of the complaint in Worcester,
Massachusetts. Dkt. no. 9; see also Fed.R.Civ.P. 4.
Service of process was properly effectuated and, as a
consequence, this Court may exercise personal jurisdiction.
to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Linda Rogers had
until July 31, 2018 to serve a responsive pleading to the
complaint. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i). To date, Linda Rogers
has not filed an answer or otherwise moved with respect to
the complaint. Moreover, Linda Rogers has neither appeared in
this action nor has she indicated a desire to contest the
has shown “by affidavit or otherwise” that Linda
Rogers has failed to plead or otherwise defend in this
action. Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(a); see also dkt. nos. 9-10.
The record and the foregoing reasons guide me to conclude
that default should be entered against Linda Rogers pursuant
to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a). I therefore
RECOMMEND that Plaintiff's motion for entry of default
(dkt. no. 10) be GRANTED.
that Linda Rogers has failed to timely answer or otherwise
move with respect to Plaintiff's complaint, and therefore
RECOMMEND that Plaintiff's ...