GREGORY v. ASTRUE, CV412-197. (2013)
Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20130828a16
Visitors: 4
Filed: Aug. 27, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 27, 2013
Summary: ORDER G.R. SMITH, Magistrate Judge. Pro se plaintiff Elijah N. Gregory seeks 42 U.S.C. 405(g) review of the Social Security Administration's denial of his disability claims. Doe. 3. The Court granted him leave to proceed in forma pauperis, doe. 3, then ordered him to brief his claim. Doc. 12. His brief was due July 31, 2013. Id. at 3. He has failed to meet that deadline. Within 14 days of the date this Order is served, he shall show cause why his ease should not be dismissed for failur
Summary: ORDER G.R. SMITH, Magistrate Judge. Pro se plaintiff Elijah N. Gregory seeks 42 U.S.C. 405(g) review of the Social Security Administration's denial of his disability claims. Doe. 3. The Court granted him leave to proceed in forma pauperis, doe. 3, then ordered him to brief his claim. Doc. 12. His brief was due July 31, 2013. Id. at 3. He has failed to meet that deadline. Within 14 days of the date this Order is served, he shall show cause why his ease should not be dismissed for failure..
More
ORDER
G.R. SMITH, Magistrate Judge.
Pro se plaintiff Elijah N. Gregory seeks 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) review of the Social Security Administration's denial of his disability claims. Doe. 3. The Court granted him leave to proceed in forma pauperis, doe. 3, then ordered him to brief his claim. Doc. 12. His brief was due July 31, 2013. Id. at 3. He has failed to meet that deadline. Within 14 days of the date this Order is served, he shall show cause why his ease should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); L.R. 41(b)).1
SO ORDERED
FootNotes
1. "The district court possesses the inherent power to police its docket" and to prune from its docket those cases that amount to no more than mere deadwood. Collins v. Lake Helen, L.P., 249 F. App'x 116, 120 (11th Cir. 2007) (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30 (1962)); Mingo v. Sugar Cane Growers Co-op, 864 F.2d 101, 102 (11th Cir.1989).
Source: Leagle
