Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Bechelli-Gonzalez v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, 16-cv-07284-MEJ. (2017)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20171016706
Filed: Oct. 13, 2017
Latest Update: Oct. 13, 2017
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE MARIA-ELENA JAMES , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Teresa Bechelli-Gonzalez filed suit pro se to appeal the denial of social security benefits. See Compl., Dkt. No. 1. The Court issued a Social Security Procedural Order, which required Defendant to serve and file an answer, together with a certified copy of the transcript of the administrative record ("AR"), within 90 days of receiving the summons and complaint. See Proc. Order 1, Dkt. No. 2. Defendant served and f
More

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Plaintiff Teresa Bechelli-Gonzalez filed suit pro se to appeal the denial of social security benefits. See Compl., Dkt. No. 1. The Court issued a Social Security Procedural Order, which required Defendant to serve and file an answer, together with a certified copy of the transcript of the administrative record ("AR"), within 90 days of receiving the summons and complaint. See Proc. Order ¶ 1, Dkt. No. 2. Defendant served and filed her Answer on May 8, 2017, and served and filed a certified copy of the AR on May 11, 2017. See Answer, Dkt. No. 16; AR, Dkt. No. 17. The Procedural Order then required Plaintiff to file a motion for summary judgment or for remand within 28 days of service of the Answer; Plaintiff's deadline for doing so therefore was, at the latest, June 8, 2017. See Proc. Order ¶ 2. As of the date of this Order, Plaintiff has not filed a motion for summary judgment or a motion for remand, and has not otherwise formally prosecuted the action.

Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court deadlines. Plaintiff shall file a declaration by November 16, 2017. Notice is hereby provided that failure to file a written response will be deemed an admission that Plaintiff does not intend to prosecute, and the case will be dismissed without prejudice. Thus, it is imperative that 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