IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 15, 2012
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States 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).
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 45 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. A review of the docket reflects that the answer and certified administrative record were served on April 11, 2012. To date, plaintiff has not filed a dispositive motion.
A review of the docket also reflects that, while defendant has notified the court regarding consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge, plaintiff has not notified the court regarding consent. Pursuant to the court's scheduling order and Eastern District of California Local Rules, Appendix A, the time to do so has now expired.
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 file a dispositive motion or notify the court regarding consent. 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.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.