◆ SpookStack

3. The records of this office show that the United States Attorney did not become aware of the fact that the plaintif had obtained a default against the federal defendants until February 7, 1985. ; 4. The matters and issues addressed in the federal defendants’ motion to set aside default and default judgment are straight forward and require no extensive briefing.- . “S. It would serve to economize the time of the Court and the parties to hear the motion to set aside the default and default judgment on February ll, 1985, along with the motion to dismiss aizeady scheduled for that date. 6. THe interests of justice would be served to hear the motion to set aside the default and default judgment promptly, to prevent any possible prejudice to the rights of the federal defendants that might occur if the default and default judgment were allowed to stand for any substantial period of time. For instance, it appears that plaintiff has obtained a default judgrent against the San Diego County Integrated Narcotics Task Force erroneously, in violation of Rule 55(e), Federal. Rules of Civil Procedure, due to a misunderstanding of the . status of that federal entity. Plaintiff may possibly attempt to execute on-this-judgment;-if itis not’ promptly set” aside. I declare that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at San Diego, California, on ou 1985. STEPHEN V. PETIX . (a) . Assistant U. S. Attorney