Huck et al v. Bureau of Land Management et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
CENTRAL DIVISION
RAINER F. HUCK; and JOHN
ANDERSON,
Plaintiffs,
v.
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT; and
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ,
Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
TO DENY PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND
DEFAULT JUDGMENT (DOC. NO. 2)
Case No. 2:25-cv-00194
District Judge Ann Marie McIff Allen
Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg
Rainer F. Huck and John Anderson, proceeding without an attorney, filed this
action against the Bureau of Land Management and the United States Department of
the Interior.1 On June 2, 2025, before BLM or DOI appeared in this case, Mr. Huck and
Mr. Anderson filed a “motion for summary judgment,” requesting entry of summary
judgment under Rule 56 or, alternatively, default judgment under Rule 55(b).2 They
attached documents indicating BLM and the United States Attorney’s Office for the
District of Utah were served on April 9, 2025, and DOI was served on April 183—
although no summonses had been issued. Mr. Huck and Mr. Anderson argued
judgment should be entered against BLM and DOI because they failed to answer or
1 (Compl., Doc. No. 1.)
2 (Mot., Doc. No. 2); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 56; Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b).
3 (Proofs of Service, Doc. No. 2 at 3–5.)
Case 2:25-cv-00194-AMA Document 18 Filed 02/06/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 1
of 4

2
otherwise defend the case within twenty-one days of service.4 Shortly thereafter, on
June 9, 2025, BLM and DOI appeared and moved to dismiss the case.5 Because Mr.
Huck and Mr. Anderson have not shown they are entitled to default judgment or
summary judgment, the undersigned6 recommends the district judge deny their motion.
Default Judgment
Rule 55 permits entry of default judgment against a party who “failed to plead or
otherwise defend.”7 First, Mr. Huck and Mr. Anderson have not shown service of
process was properly effectuated. Rule 4 requires both the complaint and a summons
to be served,8 and no summonses have been issued in this case. Mr. Huck and Mr.
Anderson also did not file proof of service on the United States Attorney General, as
required to serve a United States agency.9 Next, even if service had been properly
effectuated, Mr. Huck and Mr. Anderson incorrectly state the answer deadline. Under
Rule 12, a United States agency sued only in an official capacity must serve a
responsive pleading or motion within sixty days after service on the United States
4 (Mot. 2, Doc. No. 2.)
5 (Mot. to Dismiss, Doc. No. 3.)
6 This case is referred to the undersigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1)(B). (See Doc. No. 9.)
7 Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a), (b).
8 Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(1).
9 Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1)(B), (i)(2).
Case 2:25-cv-00194-AMA Document 18 Filed 02/06/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 2
of 4

3
attorney.10 Mr. Huck and Mr. Anderson assert the United States attorney was served
on April 9, 2025, making the deadline to file a responsive pleading or motion June 9,
2025 (had service been proper).11 The defendants filed a motion to dismiss by that
deadline. Accordingly, the defendants have not failed to plead or otherwise defend the
case.
Further, default judgment may be entered against a United States agency “only if
the claimant establishes a claim or right to relief by evidence that satisfies the court.”12
Mr. Huck and Mr. Anderson submitted no such evidence with their motion. Additionally,
the undersigned has issued a separate Report and Recommendation to grant the
defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim for relief under Rule 12(b)(6).13
For the same reasons stated in that Report and Recommendation, Mr. Huck and Mr.
Anderson cannot establish a claim or right to relief under Rule 55(d).
Summary Judgment
Under Rule 56, the court will grant summary judgment if “the movant shows that
there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to
judgment as a matter of law.”14 Where Mr. Huck and Mr. Anderson fail to state a
10 Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(2).
11 Sixty days after April 9, 2025 was June 8, 2025, a Sunday. Therefore, the deadline
was extended to the next day that was not a weekend or legal holiday—June 9, 2025.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(1)(C).
12 Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(d).
13 (See Doc. No. 17.)
14 Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a).
Case 2:25-cv-00194-AMA Document 18 Filed 02/06/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 3
of 4

4
plausible claim for relief,15 they cannot show they are entitled to judgment as a matter of
law.
RECOMMENDATION
The undersigned recommends the district judge deny Mr. Huck and Mr.
Anderson’s motion for summary judgment and default judgment.16 The parties have the
right to object to this Report and Recommendation within fourteen days, and failure to
object may be considered a waiver of objections.17
DATED this 6th day of February, 2026.
BY THE COURT:
_____________________________
Daphne A. Oberg
United States Magistrate Judge
15 (See Doc. No. 17.)
16 (Doc. No. 2.)
17 See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed R. Civ. P. 72(b).
Case 2:25-cv-00194-AMA Document 18 Filed 02/06/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 4
of 4