Filed: Jan. 03, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 03, 2018
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER STEPHANIE A. GALLAGHER , Magistrate Judge . This appeal of a denial of Social Security disability benefits was assigned to me by consent of the parties. [ECF No. 9]. On October 18, 2017, Plaintiff's Counsel filed a motion to withdraw his appearance, citing an inability to contact his client. [ECF No. 21]. In light of that information, on October 20, 2017, this Court ordered Plaintiff to advise in writing whether she intended to proceed pro se or to retain new counsel
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER STEPHANIE A. GALLAGHER , Magistrate Judge . This appeal of a denial of Social Security disability benefits was assigned to me by consent of the parties. [ECF No. 9]. On October 18, 2017, Plaintiff's Counsel filed a motion to withdraw his appearance, citing an inability to contact his client. [ECF No. 21]. In light of that information, on October 20, 2017, this Court ordered Plaintiff to advise in writing whether she intended to proceed pro se or to retain new counsel,..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
STEPHANIE A. GALLAGHER, Magistrate Judge.
This appeal of a denial of Social Security disability benefits was assigned to me by consent of the parties. [ECF No. 9]. On October 18, 2017, Plaintiff's Counsel filed a motion to withdraw his appearance, citing an inability to contact his client. [ECF No. 21]. In light of that information, on October 20, 2017, this Court ordered Plaintiff to advise in writing whether she intended to proceed pro se or to retain new counsel, and indicated that if Plaintiff failed to file a response, the Commissioner may seek to dismiss her case. [ECF No. 24]. Plaintiff did not respond. On December 4, 2017, the Commissioner filed a Motion to Dismiss the appeal. [ECF No. 25]. The Court sent Plaintiff a Rule 12/56 letter, advising her that a failure to respond to the Commissioner's motion might result in dismissal, but Plaintiff still did not file any response by the deadline. [ECF No. 26].
This Court may dismiss a case if a plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with a court order. Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 41(b); see also Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 633 (1962). In light of the particular factual circumstances presented here, such dismissal is appropriate.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED, this 3rd day of January, 2018, that the Commissioner's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 25] is GRANTED, and the Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case.
