Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Michelle Lingenfelter v. Michael J. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


December 18, 2012

MICHELLE LINGENFELTER,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER TO FILE DECLARATION

) SUBSTANTIATING PLAINTIFF'S ) PLACE OF RESIDENCE AND SHOW

) CAUSE WHY THE CASE SHOULD NOT ) BE TRANSFERRED

On January 9, 2012, Plaintiff filed the present action in this Court. Plaintiff seeks review of the Commissioner's denial of her application for benefits. In her complaint, Plaintiff asserts that venue is proper in this district because she is a resident of Fresno County. (Docs. 1, 2.) However, the Court finds nothing in the record that indicates Plaintiff currently resides in Fresno County. For example, notice of the Appeals Council's November 8, 2011, denial of review was sent to Plaintiff in Santa Clara, California. (Administrative Record ("AR") 1.) The hearing before the Administrative Law Judge took place in San Jose, California. (AR 68.) The appointment of representative form that Plaintiff completed reflects that she resides in Santa Clara, California. (AR 110.)

Federal law is clear on the issue of venue; the claimant must file suit in the judicial district where he or she resides, or has a principal place of business. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). If the claimant files suit in the wrong district, the Court may transfer venue to the proper district. Because the evidence contained in the Administrative Record does not comport with the Civil Cover Sheet Plaintiff submitted as to her place of residence, Plaintiff shall file a declaration under penalty of perjury setting forth her address at the time she filed her complaint and her current address, to the extent it has changed since January 9, 2012. In support of her declaration, Plaintiff shall provide documentary evidence sufficient to establish her residential address at the time she filed her complaint, and her current address to the extent it has changed since January 9, 2012, such as a utility statement. To the extent Plaintiff's place of residence is not within this district, Plaintiff should show cause why this case should not be transferred to the appropriate district court.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that on or before January 4, 2013:

1. Plaintiff shall file a declaration signed under penalty of perjury setting forth her place of residence at the time she filed her complaint in this matter and her current residential address, to the extent it has changed since January 9, 2012; and

2. To the extent Plaintiff's place of residence is not within this district, Plaintiff shall show cause why this case should not be transferred to the appropriate district court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20121218

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.