Ajax Paving v. Asphalt Milling, 2:15-cv-00629

Ajax Paving filed a Third-Party Complaint against Asphalt Milling Services, LLC and served process on Asphalt Milling via a process server on December 10, 2015, delivering the summons and complaint to Jack O’Connor, identified as Asphalt Milling’s manager.
Ajax Paving moved for entry of Clerk’s Default under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a) because Asphalt Milling did not file a response within the time required by Rule 12.
The Return of Service (sworn affidavit by the process server) was submitted and constituted a prima facie showing of proper service.
The Court reviewed applicable service rules: Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(h)(1)(A) and (e)(1) and Fla. Stat. § 48.081 governing corporate service.
The Court found service proper and Asphalt Milling’s failure to answer timely justified entry of default.
The Court granted Ajax Paving’s motion and directed the Clerk to enter Clerk’s Default against Asphalt Milling Services, LLC on January 22, 2016.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether service on Asphalt Milling was properly effected	Service was made by delivering summons and complaint to Jack O’Connor, manager, satisfying Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 and Fla. Stat. § 48.081	(No responsive brief; implicitly contested by absence of response)	Service was proper based on process server’s sworn return and applicable rules
Whether Clerk’s Default should be entered for failure to respond	Default appropriate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a) and M.D. Fla. Local R. 1.07(b) because no answer was filed within 21 days	(No response filed)	Default entered; Asphalt Milling failed to timely answer as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)

Udoinyion v. The Guardian Security, [citation="440 F. App'x 731"] (11th Cir. 2011) (process-server affidavit creates a prima facie showing of proper service)