AMENDED ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO OBEY A COURT ORDER AND FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

BARBARA A. McAULIFFE, Magistrate Judge.

On March 29, 2018, Plaintiff Bernard Liscano filed a complaint seeking review of the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of his social security benefits. (Doc. No. 1.) On April 25, 2018, this Court entered a scheduling order in this action. (Doc. No. 7.) Pursuant to the Court's scheduling order, Plaintiff is required to prosecute this action by either seeking voluntary remand or filing a dispositive motion within 95 days from the date of service of the administrative record by Defendant. 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.

The administrative record was filed and served on September 6, 2018. (Doc. No. 11.) Plaintiff's opening brief was therefore due no later than December 10, 2018. However, Plaintiff had not filed his opening brief, and, on January 29, 2019, the Court issued an order to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with the Court's order and failure to prosecute this action. (Doc. No. 13.) On February 12, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking a sixty (60) day extension of time to respond to the Court's order to show cause. (Doc. No. 14.) Plaintiff explained that he was not aware that the administrative record had been filed and he was in the process of seeking legal advice. As the motion appeared to explain why Plaintiff failed to timely file his opening brief, on February 14, 2019, the order to show cause was discharged and Plaintiff was ordered to file his opening brief within sixty (60) days of service of the Court's order. (Doc. No. 17)

On April 15, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting a further sixty-day extension of time to file his opening brief. (Doc. No. 19.) According to the motion, Plaintiff had been unable to locate an attorney to take his case and he was waiting for an opening with a paralegal agency to assist him in preparing his opening brief. (Id.) Plaintiff further stated that counsel for the Commissioner verbally agreed to a two-month extension of time for Plaintiff to file his opening brief. (Id.) Accordingly, on April 21, 2018, the Court granted Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to file his opening brief. (Doc. No. 21.) Plaintiff was ordered to file his opening brief within sixty (60) days of service of the Court's order. (Id.) On April 19, 2019, Plaintiff was served by mail with a copy of the Court's order. To date, Plaintiff has not filed his opening brief.1

Accordingly, Plaintiff is HEREBY ORDERED to SHOW CAUSE why this action should not be dismissed for Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's orders and Plaintiff's failure to prosecute this action. Plaintiff shall file a written response to this order to show cause no later than August 16, 2019. Plaintiff may also comply with this order by filing his opening brief.

Plaintiff is forewarned that failure to respond to this order will result in the dismissal of this action for failure to obey a court order and failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.