El-Bey v. Wallace, 1:21-cv-00389

Plaintiff J’ttonali One Eye El-Bey (traveling on a Moorish American travel document) alleges that on May 24, 2021 Franklin, Ohio officers stopped, detained, assaulted, frisked, and arrested him in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Defendants did not timely file a response; the Clerk entered default and plaintiff filed a second motion for default judgment.
Defendants contend they were not physically served (in part due to COVID-19 service accommodations) and were unaware of the action or the deadline; after the Court’s show-cause order they responded and moved to set aside the default and for leave to file a responsive pleading.
The magistrate applied the Rule 55(c) three-factor test (prejudice, meritorious defense, culpable conduct) and relevant Sixth Circuit guidance on default relief.
The court concluded there was no evidence of prejudice or willful misconduct, granted defendants’ motion to set aside the default, denied plaintiff’s second motion for default judgment, denied plaintiff’s motion to identify (directing discovery instead), and granted defendants leave to file a responsive pleading (which includes a motion to dismiss).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether to enter default judgment or set aside clerk’s default	Default judgment due to defendants’ failure to timely respond	Not properly served; COVID service accommodations; unaware of deadline; no willful default; meritorious defenses available	Default set aside under Rule 55(c); plaintiff’s default-judgment motion denied
Whether court should order disclosure of defendants’ "true names"	Court should reveal defendants’ true names as a matter of law	Identifying information is obtainable through discovery from counsel	Motion to identify denied; plaintiff may obtain names via discovery
Whether to permit defendants to file a responsive pleading (including motion to dismiss)	(No opposition noted)	Requests leave to file responsive pleading and attached motion to dismiss	Leave to file granted

Shepard Claims Serv., Inc. v. William Darrah & Assoc., 796 F.2d 190 (6th Cir. 1986) (sets out Rule 55(c) factors and emphasizes resolving cases on the merits absent willful default)
INVST Fin. Group, Inc. v. Chem-Nuclear Sys., Inc., 815 F.2d 391 (6th Cir. 1987) (delay alone does not establish prejudice; prejudice requires loss of evidence or discovery difficulties)
Dassault Systemes, SA v. Childress, 663 F.3d 832 (6th Cir. 2011) (quotes and applies the prejudice standard for setting aside default)
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985) (procedural rule: failure to timely object to magistrate recommendations may forfeit appellate rights)
United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981) (same principle regarding objections to magistrate judge reports)