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.

Danny Murray v. Carolyn W. Colvin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 4, 2013

DANNY MURRAY,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, DEFENDANT.

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

ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF FILE AN OPENING BRIEF NO LATER THAN APRIL 17, 2013 (Doc. 16)

On April 5, 2012, Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Commissioner of Social Security ("Defendant" or "Commissioner"), appealing a denial of his application for social security benefits. (Doc. 1.) The Court issued a scheduling order (Doc. 5) as well as an amended informational order for pro se litigants (Doc. 9), setting forth the deadlines in the case and explaining what must be included in the opening brief that Plaintiff is to file with the Court.

On October 4, 2012, Plaintiff was served with the administrative record. (Docs. 13, 14, 15.) Plaintiff was required to serve the Commissioner with a confidential letter brief within 30 days of service of the administrative record. Plaintiff sought an extension of time, which was granted, permitting Plaintiff until November 26, 2012, to serve his confidential letter brief on the Commissioner. (Doc. 17.)

On November 21, 2012, Plaintiff filed a statement that appears to be the "confidential" letter brief. (Doc. 18.) The Commissioner filed a certificate of service indicating that a responsive confidential letter brief was served on Plaintiff on December 19, 2012. (Doc. 19.) Thus, Plaintiff was required to file an opening brief no later than January 22, 2013, but Plaintiff failed to do so. On February 22, 2013, the court issued an order requiring Plaintiff no later than March 1, 2013, to either file an opening brief or show cause why the case should not be dismissed for Plaintiff's failure to timely file an opening brief. That order, however, was not properly served on Plaintiff, and the Court allowed Plaintiff until April 3, 2013, to file an opening brief or show cause why a brief was not filed. (Doc. 23.)

On April 3, 2013, Plaintiff filed a statement that he was unable to file a brief timely because of impairments which preclude him from performing work. (Doc. 24.) While the Court is sympathetic to Plaintiff's impairments, he is not relieved from the duty to file a brief that comports with the requirements set forth in the Scheduling Order (Doc. 5) and in the Amended Informational Order (Doc. 9).

Plaintiff will be provided with a final opportunity to file an opening brief no later than April 17, 2013. If Plaintiff files an opening brief, the order to show cause will be discharged. If Plaintiff fails to file an opening brief by April 17, 2013, the Court will recommend that Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed with prejudice.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff file an opening brief by no later than April 17, 2013.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20130404

© 1992-2013 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.