Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00862/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00862-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD LAWRENCE, )

)

Plaintiff, )

v. )

)

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, )

Commissioner of Social Security, ) 

 )

Defendant. )

 )

Case No.: 1:09-cv-00862-JLT

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY

COMPLAINT SHOULD NOT BE

DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY

WITH SCHEDULING ORDER

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this action seeking judicial review of a final decision of

the Commissioner of Social Security denying his application for benefits.

By previous order of the Court, Plaintiff was granted an extension of time until June 2,

2010, to file an Opening Brief. (Doc. 22) Plaintiff has failed to comply with this deadline and

has failed to comply with the original scheduling order which set deadlines within which his

opening brief was to be filed. The scheduling order explains that failure to comply with its

provisions may result in sanctions pursuant to Local Rule 110. (Doc. 6 at 4.)

Therefore, Plaintiff shall have until June 14, 2010 to file an Opening Brief or, in lieu

thereof, to file a motion seeking an extension of time supported by good cause. Plaintiff is

forewarned that his failure to comply with this Order will result in dismissal of this action

pursuant to the inherent power of the Court or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Fed. R. Civ.

P. 41(b), 11; Local Rule 110; Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 31, 42-43 (1991). 

1

Case 1:09-cv-00862-JLT Document 23 Filed 06/07/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have until June 14, 2010, to

file an Opening Brief that complies with paragraph 11 of the Court’s Scheduling Order of May

18, 2009 (Doc. 6) or, in lieu thereof, a motion for an extension of time supported by good cause.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 4, 2010 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

9j7khi UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

2

Case 1:09-cv-00862-JLT Document 23 Filed 06/07/10 Page 2 of 2