Blackstock v. Goldberg et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Gregg Blackstock
v. 	Case No. 16-cv-411-LM
Adult Parole Board Executive
Assistant Andrea Goldberg and
Offender Records Administrator
Cindy Crompton
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Before the Court is New Hampshire State Prison (“NHSP”)
inmate Gregg Blackstock’s motion for default (Doc. No. 11).
Blackstock argues that a default should be entered against
respondents for their failure to file an answer in accordance
with this court’s February 15, 2018 Order (Doc. No. 9)
(“February 15 Order”) directing service of the petition upon the
respondents and requiring respondents to file an answer to the
petition.
“[A] default cannot be entered unless the court has both
personal and subject-matter jurisdiction over the parties
against whom the default judgment is sought. 	The court, of
course, cannot have personal jurisdiction if service of process
has not been properly effectuated.” 	Sergentakis v. Channell,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-11101-DHH, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4742, at
*1-*2, 2017 WL 129989, at *1 (D. Mass. Jan. 12, 2017) (citing
Case 1:16-cv-00411-LM Document 23 Filed 01/10/19 Page 1 of 3

2
10A Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and
Procedure § 2682 (4th ed. 2008).
On April 11, 2018, this court entered the following
Endorsed Order (“April 11 Order”) in this case:
On February 15, 2018, the court issued an Order (Doc.
No. 9) (“February 15 Order”) directing service in this
case upon the respondent, pursuant to the Agreement
[on] Acceptance of Service . . . . 	Through no fault
of either party, the court inadvertently failed to
notify the AG of the pendency of this case, or to
serve upon the AG the Order directing the respondents
to file an answer to the petition. 	Accordingly, the
clerk’s office is directed to serve the respondent at
this time as set forth in the February 15 Order.
Respondent is directed to answer or otherwise respond
to the petition in accordance with Admin. Order 18-1.
The clerk’s office is directed to send the petitioner
a copy of Admin. Order 18-1 along [] with a copy of
this Order.
April 11 Order. 	Since the issuance of that Order, the
respondents have responded to the petition in this case by
filing a motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 17) and other documents
(Doc. Nos. 13, 14, 15, 16) in compliance with Admin. Order 18-1.
Prior to the issuance of the April 11 Order, the
respondents had not been served in this matter. 	The respondents
were not obligated to answer or otherwise respond prior to
service. 	Once served, the respondents filed a timely response
as directed. 	Accordingly, the entry of default is inappropriate
in this matter, and the district judge should deny Blackstock’s
motion (Doc. No. 11) seeking such relief.
Case 1:16-cv-00411-LM Document 23 Filed 01/10/19 Page 2 of 3

3
Any objections to this Report and Recommendation must be
filed within fourteen days of receipt of this notice. 	See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). 	The fourteen-day period may be extended
upon motion. 	Failure to file specific written objections to the
Report and Recommendation within the specified time waives the
right to appeal the district court’s order. 	See Santos-Santos
v. Torres-Centeno, 842 F.3d 163, 168 (1st Cir. 2016).
__________________________
Andrea K. Johnstone
United States Magistrate Judge
January 10, 2019
cc: 	Gregg Blackstock, pro se
Elizabeth C. Woodcock, Esq.
Case 1:16-cv-00411-LM Document 23 Filed 01/10/19 Page 3 of 3