Opinion
2:23-cv-948-JES-KCD
04-08-2024
KATHLEEN HERMAN and JEFFREY GHIAZZA, Plaintiffs, v. THE MR. COOPER GROUP INC., Defendant.
ORDER
KYLE C. DUDEK, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiffs Kathleen Herman and Jeffrey Ghiazza seek a Clerk's default against Defendant the Mr. Cooper Group, Inc. (Doc. 73.) The motion is DENIED because Defendant has appeared and defended itself by filing a motion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(e). A Clerk's default is not proper on such facts. See, e.g., Wagner v. Potter, No. 2:03CV511FTM-99DNF, 2006 WL 2935252, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 13, 2006) (denying motion for default where “the government appeared by filing a Rule 12(e) Motion for More Definite Statement”); Montecalvo v. Brandon Auto Clinic, Inc., No. 8:07-CV-851-T-30MSS, 2007 WL 2155581, at *1 (M.D. Fla. July 26, 2007) (“The Rule does not contemplate the entry of default only upon a defendant's failure to answer, but rather upon a defendant's failure to respond or defend against the allegations in a complaint.
A Motion for more Definite Statement clearly is an attempt by Defendants to defend against the allegations in the Complaint.”).