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.

Daniel Bustos v. Michael J. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


December 19, 2012

DANIEL BUSTOS,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
DEFENDANT.

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

ORDER TO FILE DECLARATION SUBSTANTIATING PLAINTIFF'S PLACE OF RESIDENCE AND SHOW CAUSE WHY THE CASE SHOULD NOT BE TRANSFERRED

On May 2, 2012, Plaintiff filed the present action in this Court. Plaintiff seeks review of the Commissioner's denial of his application for benefits. In his complaint, Plaintiff asserts that venue is proper in the Fresno Division of this district because he is a resident of Fresno County. (Docs. 2, 7.) However, the Court finds nothing in the record that indicates Plaintiff currently resides in Fresno County or in a county that is within the Fresno Division of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California ("Eastern District"). For example, notice of the Appeals Council's February 29, 2012, denial of review was sent to Plaintiff in Stockton, California, which is in San Joaquin County. (Administrative Record ("AR") 1.) The hearing before the Administrative Law Judge took place in Stockton, California. (AR 35.) The appointment of representative form that Plaintiff completed reflects that Plaintiff resides in Stockton, California. (AR 137.)

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 his place of residence, Plaintiff shall file a declaration under penalty of perjury setting forth his address at the time he filed his complaint and his current address, to the extent it has changed since May 2, 2012. In support of his declaration, Plaintiff shall provide documentary evidence sufficient to establish his residential address at the time he filed his complaint, and his current address to the extent it has changed since May 2, 2012, such as a utility statement. To the extent Plaintiff's place of residence is not within this district or within the Fresno division of the Eastern District, Plaintiff should show cause why this case should not be transferred to the appropriate district court or division.

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 his place of residence at the time he filed the complaint in this matter and his current residential address, to the extent it has changed since May 2, 2012; and

2. To the extent Plaintiff's place of residence is not within this district or within the counties of the Fresno Division of the Eastern District, Plaintiff shall show cause why this case should not be transferred to the appropriate district or division.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20121219

© 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.