Kaska
v.
Group

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOISSep 5, 2018
Case No. 18-cv-1174-JPG-SCW (S.D. Ill. Sep. 5, 2018)

Case No. 18-cv-1174-JPG-SCW

09-05-2018

BRITTANY N. KASKA, Plaintiff, v. ALLIANT ACQUISITION GROUP, Defendant.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff Brittany N. Kaska's motion for default judgment (Doc. 8) in this case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq., and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227, et seq. She arranged for service of the summons and complaint on defendant Alliant Acquisition Group ("Alliant") on June 14, 2018, Alliant did not respond within 20 days of service, and the Clerk of Court entered default against Alliant on August 3, 2018, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) (Doc. 7). Kaska now asks for default judgment under Rule 55(b) (Doc. 8). She has not, however, provided evidence that she has sent notice of the entry of default on Alliant as required by Local Rule 55.1(a). For this reason, the Court DENIES without prejudice Kaska's motion for default judgment (Doc. 8). She may reapply once she has served notice of entry of default on Alliant. Further, because the Court has questions whether service of process was actually accomplished in a manner that satisfies Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, the plaintiff should explain in any subsequent motion for default judgment why service of process was sufficient under Rule 4, particularly under Rule 4(k). IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: September 5
, 2018

s/ J. Phil Gilbert


J. PHIL GILBERT


DISTRICT JUDGE