Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00702/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00702-4/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

1

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PHYLLIS L.FATH, )

)

Plaintiff, )

v. )

)

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, )

Commissioner of Social Security, ) 

 )

Defendant. )

 )

1:08-cv-0702-JLT

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY

AMENDED 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 her application for benefits.

By previous order of the Court, Plaintiff was granted an extension of time to file an

Opening Brief until February 8, 2010. (Doc. 30). Plaintiff has failed to comply with the deadline

set by the Court in that order, which in turn modified the original scheduling order to provide her

additional time to file an Opening Brief. The scheduling order explains that failure to comply

with its provisions may result in sanctions pursuant to former Local Rule 11-110 which is current

Local Rule 110. (Doc. 8 at 4.)

Therefore, Plaintiff shall have until February 26, 2010 to either file an Opening Brief or,

in lieu thereof, a written motion seeking an extension of time supported by good cause. Plaintiff

is forewarned that 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.

Case 1:08-cv-00702-JLT Document 32 Filed 02/12/10 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

2

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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff shall have until February 26, 2010, to file an Opening Brief that

complies with paragraph 11 of the Court’s Scheduling Order of May 21,

2008 (Doc. 8) or, in lieu thereof, a written motion for an extension of time

supported by good cause;

2. Defendant shall have 30 days from the filing of Plaintiff’s Opening Brief

within which to file a Responsive Brief. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 12, 2010 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

9j7khi UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:08-cv-00702-JLT Document 32 Filed 02/12/10 Page 2 of 2