Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Thavixay v. Commissioner of Social Security, 18-cv-06477-TSH. (2019)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20190621957 Visitors: 4
Filed: Jun. 20, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 20, 2019
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Re: Dkt. No. 21 THOMAS S. HIXSON , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Diane Thavixay brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405(g), seeking judicial review of a final decision denying her claim for disability benefits. Pursuant to the October 25, 2018, Social Security Procedural Order issued in this case, Thavixay was required to file a motion for summary judgment or for remand within 28 days of service of the Commissioner's answer. ECF No. 4. As the Commissioner served h
More

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Re: Dkt. No. 21

Plaintiff Diane Thavixay brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of a final decision denying her claim for disability benefits. Pursuant to the October 25, 2018, Social Security Procedural Order issued in this case, Thavixay was required to file a motion for summary judgment or for remand within 28 days of service of the Commissioner's answer. ECF No. 4. As the Commissioner served her answer on April 17, 2019 (ECF Nos. 17, 18), Thavixay's motion was due May 15, 2019. On May 29, 2019, 14 days after failing to file a timely motion, Thavixay filed a stipulation for extension of time requesting the Court grant her until June 19, 2019, to file a motion for summary judgment and joint statement of facts. ECF No. 19. The Court granted her request. ECF No. 21. However, as of June 20, 2019, no filing has been received. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff Diane Thavixay to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court deadlines. Thavixay shall file a declaration by June 27, 2019. Notice is hereby provided that failure to file a written response will be deemed an admission that Thavixay does not intend to prosecute, and the case will be dismissed without prejudice. Thus, it is imperative the Court receive a written response by the deadline above.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer