Kotera v. Berryhill, 18-cv-00297-SK. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20190115b56
Visitors: 13
Filed: Jan. 11, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 11, 2019
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE Regarding Docket Nos. 18, 19 SALLIE KIM , Magistrate Judge . On January 12, 2018, Plaintiff filed a complaint appealing the denial of social security benefits. Defendant filed an answer on April 23, 2018. Pursuant to the Scheduling Order filed on January 16, 2018, Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as due within twenty-eight days of Defendant's answer. (Dkt. 6.) Plaintiff, however, failed to file his motion for summary judgment. It came
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE Regarding Docket Nos. 18, 19 SALLIE KIM , Magistrate Judge . On January 12, 2018, Plaintiff filed a complaint appealing the denial of social security benefits. Defendant filed an answer on April 23, 2018. Pursuant to the Scheduling Order filed on January 16, 2018, Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as due within twenty-eight days of Defendant's answer. (Dkt. 6.) Plaintiff, however, failed to file his motion for summary judgment. It came ..
More
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE
Regarding Docket Nos. 18, 19
SALLIE KIM, Magistrate Judge.
On January 12, 2018, Plaintiff filed a complaint appealing the denial of social security benefits. Defendant filed an answer on April 23, 2018. Pursuant to the Scheduling Order filed on January 16, 2018, Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as due within twenty-eight days of Defendant's answer. (Dkt. 6.) Plaintiff, however, failed to file his motion for summary judgment. It came to the Court's attention that Plaintiff's counsel, Kenneth Collins, had passed away. Accordingly, the Court issued an order directing Plaintiff to file a notice of intent to proceed pro se or substitute in new counsel by October 1, 2018. (Dkt. 19.) The Court admonished Plaintiff that if he failed to notice of intent to proceed pro se or substitute in new counsel, the Court would dismiss this action without prejudice. The Order was served on Plaintiff at his address contained in the Certified Administrative Record. To date, Plaintiff has not responded to the Order or communicated with the Court in any way. Therefore, the Court HEREBY DISMISSES this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
