Hagar v. Commissioner of Social Security, 2:17-CV-2381-CMK. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20180619724
Visitors: 21
Filed: Jun. 18, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 18, 2018
Summary: ORDER CRAIG M. KELLISON , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, who is proceeding with retained counsel, brings this action under 42 U.S.C. 405(g) for judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security. On November 14, 2017, the court issued a scheduling order which required plaintiff to complete service of process on defendant within 20 days, and to file a notice of completion of service with the court within 10 days thereafter. Plaintiff was warned that failure to compl
Summary: ORDER CRAIG M. KELLISON , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, who is proceeding with retained counsel, brings this action under 42 U.S.C. 405(g) for judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security. On November 14, 2017, the court issued a scheduling order which required plaintiff to complete service of process on defendant within 20 days, and to file a notice of completion of service with the court within 10 days thereafter. Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply..
More
ORDER
CRAIG M. KELLISON, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff, who is proceeding with retained counsel, brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security. On November 14, 2017, the court issued a scheduling order which required plaintiff to complete service of process on defendant within 20 days, and to file a notice of completion of service with the court within 10 days thereafter. Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply may result in dismissal of this action for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court orders and rules. See Local Rule 11-110. More than 30 days have elapsed and plaintiff has not complied.
Plaintiff shall show cause in writing, within 30 days of the date of this order, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to complete service of process. Plaintiff is again warned that failure to respond to this order may result in dismissal of the action for the reasons outlined above, as well as for failure to prosecute and comply with court rules and orders. See id.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
