Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00503/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00503-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gregory Chandler
Plaintiff
Timothy Lee Gray
Defendant
Barbara V. Perkins
Defendant
Social Security Administration
Defendant

Document Text:

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GREGORY CHANDLER,

Plaintiff,

 v

BARBARA PERKINS and TIMOTHY LEE

GRAY,

Defendants.

 /

No C 05-0503 VRW

 ORDER

On February 15, 2008, this matter was reassigned to the

undersigned judge. For the reasons stated herein, the court now

dismisses this action sua sponte. 

Plaintiff Gregory Chandler filed his complaint seeking the

recovery of attorney fees for his work representing defendant

Barbara V Perkins. Doc #1. The complaint named as defendants, in

addition to Perkins, the Social Security Administration and Timothy

Lee Gray. The complaint identified the latter as “the

representative payee for Perkins.” Complaint ¶1. Chandler served

Perkins with the complaint. Doc #4. 

Case 3:05-cv-00503-VRW Document 24 Filed 03/18/08 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Social Security Administration Commissioner Jo Ann

Barnhart moved for dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

12(b)(4) and 12(b)(5) (Doc #7); on September 27, 2005, the court

granted the motion without prejudice. Doc # 18. Separately,

Chandler moved for entry of default against the Social Security

Administration and Perkins. Doc #10. The court referred the latter

to a magistrate judge who, on October 27, 2005, recommended denial

of the motion because the clerk had declined to enter default

against both defendants. Doc #19. Chandler did not object to the

report and recommendation and, in fact, there was no activity in the

case for an interval of five months until March 24, 2006, when the

court entered an order adopting the report and recommendation of the

magistrate judge. Doc #20. 

On March 26, 2006 and again on July 5, 2006, Chandler

filed motions for an order to show cause as to Perkins, specifically

“why she has not filed an answer or response in this action.” Doc

#21, 22. There was no response to this motion, nor was there any

hearing held on the motion or motions. 

The case then lay dormant for eighteen months until the

clerk of the court reassigned it. 

Because Chandler (1) took no steps to prosecute his action

against Gray; (2) has not re-filed his complaint against Barnhart

(now Astrue); and (3) has taken no steps to pursue his claim against

Perkins in the past eighteen months, it is appropriate to dismiss

this action in its entirety, without prejudice. 

\\

\\

\\

\\

Case 3:05-cv-00503-VRW Document 24 Filed 03/18/08 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

3

The clerk is directed to close the file and terminate all

pending motions. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

VAUGHN R WALKER

United States District Chief Judge

Case 3:05-cv-00503-VRW Document 24 Filed 03/18/08 Page 3 of 3