Corpus: 543,223 opinions · 3,177 judges · newest 2026-06-23 · expanding Coverage ↗
Opinion

govinfo:USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01782-11

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California · 2026-06-09

· GavelSight synced 2026-09-06 03:52:11

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
JONATHAN MARQUEZ, 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
O. ORTIZ, et al., 
Defendants. 
Case No. 1:23-cv-01782 KES EPG 
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING 
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR DEFAULT 
JUDGMENT 
Docs. 65, 68 
Jonathan Marquez seeks to hold defendant Ortiz liable for excessive force in violation of 
his Eighth Amendment rights. See Doc. 18; Doc. 7. Plaintiff seeks default judgment, asserting 
that he has “had to make the Defendant and his attorney answer [his discovery requests] by force 
… using Court Federal Civil Rules” and that Defendant has prolonged the litigation by not 
agreeing to participate in a settlement conference. Doc 65 at 1-2. Plaintiff contends the Court 
should enter default judgment as a sanction for “procrastination of the defense.” Id. at 2. 
 On April 20, 2026, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations that 
Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment be denied. Doc. 68 at 3-4. The Court served the findings 
and recommendations on Plaintiff and granted 30 days to file any objections. Id. at 4. The Court 
informed Plaintiff that a failure to file timely objections may result in the waiver of rights on 
appeal. Id. (citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014)). Plaintiff did not 
file objections, and the time to do so expired. 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
 
 
 2 
 
 
Consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court reviewed this matter de novo. Having 
carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes that the findings and recommendations are 
supported by the record and proper analysis. The Court ORDERS: 
1. The findings and recommendations issued April 20, 2026 (Doc. 68) are 
ADOPTED in full. 
2. Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment (Doc 65) is DENIED. 
 
 
 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
 
 Dated: June 8, 2026 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 
 
 
 
 

Passage view · GavelSight