Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00020/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00020-7/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Commissioner of Social Security
Defendant
Ryan Craig Stevens
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

RYAN CRAIG STEVENS,

Plaintiff,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL

SECURITY,

Defendant.

_____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 1: 12-cv-00020-BAM

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

(Doc. 34)

On April 19, 2013, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a motion asking

the Court to rule on his “Motion for Default Judgment filed on February 13, 2013.” In his motion, 1

Plaintiff argues that the Court should grant his Social Security appeal because the Commissioner

failed to file and serve its opposition brief by February 11, 2013. (Doc. 34, Ex. A). 

This Court issued an order denying the merits of Plaintiff’s claim for benefits on March 29,

2013. On that same day, judgment against Plaintiff was entered and his case closed. No further

action is necessary or will be taken in this case. Plaintiff has been previously admonished to

Plaintiff’s Motion For Default Judgment was not filed on February 13, 2013. Plaintiff filed his Motion for

1

Default Judgment on April 3, 2013, after the Court issued an order on the merits dismissing his complaint. (Doc. 32).

On February 13, 2013, Plaintiff filed an “Opposition” to the Commissioner’s response brief alleging that Defendant’s

response brief had not been filed as of February 11, 2013. (Doc. 25). On that same day, the Commissioner filed and

served a reply to Plaintiff’s “Opposition” with supporting proofs of service and declarations establishing that its response

was indeed filed and served on Plaintiff and the Court on February 7, 2013. (Doc. 26). Having reviewed the docket, the

Commissioner’s Response Brief and Proof of Service were timely filed and served on February 7, 2013, as required by

the Court’s Case Management Order.

1

Case 1:12-cv-00020-BAM Document 35 Filed 05/14/13 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

carefully review each and every order of this Court. (Doc. 19). He has not done so. Plaintiff also

was informed on April 9, 2013, that his “Motion for Default Judgment” was STRICKEN because

his case has been dismissed and closed. (Doc. 33). Ignoring the Court’s orders, Plaintiff filed the

instant motion. Plaintiff’s “Motion for the Court to Issue an order, or issue a copy of the Order, in

regard to Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment Filed, February13, 2013,which Predates the Order

of the Judgment Entered on March 29, 2013 ” is DENIED. Any further motions of this nature will

be stricken from the record.

The Clerk is directed to serve a copy of this Order on Plaintiff at 1151 Black Oak Drive,

Tehachapi, CA 93561. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 13, 2013 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe 

10c20k UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:12-cv-00020-BAM Document 35 Filed 05/14/13 Page 2 of 2