Suske v. Commissioner of Social Security, 2:19-CV-0959-DMC. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20190719833
Visitors: 9
Filed: Jul. 18, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 18, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENNIS M. COTA , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, who is proceeding with retained counsel, brings this action for judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security under 42 U.S.C. 405(g). On May 29, 2019, the court granted plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. That order required plaintiff to submit to the United States Marshal, within 15 days of the date of service of the order, a completed summons and copies of the complaint, and file a s
Summary: ORDER DENNIS M. COTA , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, who is proceeding with retained counsel, brings this action for judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security under 42 U.S.C. 405(g). On May 29, 2019, the court granted plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. That order required plaintiff to submit to the United States Marshal, within 15 days of the date of service of the order, a completed summons and copies of the complaint, and file a st..
More
ORDER
DENNIS M. COTA, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff, who is proceeding with retained counsel, brings this action for judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On May 29, 2019, the court granted plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. That order required plaintiff to submit to the United States Marshal, within 15 days of the date of service of the order, a completed summons and copies of the complaint, and file a statement with the court that said documents have been submitted. Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply may result in dismissal of this action for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court rules and orders. See Local Rule 110. More than 15 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 submit service documents to the United States Marshall. The filing of a notice that plaintiff has submitted service documents to the United States Marshall shall constitute a sufficient response to this order. 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
