Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01725/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01725-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Commissioner of Social Security
Defendant
Rebecca Kreisher
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHERYL CARREIRA, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-09-1672 EFB

vs.

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant. 

 /

REBECCA KREISHER, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-09-1725 EFB

vs.

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant. 

 /

TAMMYE BURNHAM,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-09-2054 EFB

vs.

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,

Commissioner of Social Security, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Defendant. 

 /

Case 2:09-cv-01725-EFB Document 19 Filed 07/12/10 Page 1 of 3
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

2

The above-captioned actions are all proceeding before the undersigned pursuant to the

consent of the parties. E.D. Cal. L.R. 305; Fed. R. Civ. P. 73. Each plaintiff is represented by

attorney Bess M. Brewer. The scheduling order in each of the cases provides that “[f]ailure to

comply with any portion of this schedule may result in sanctions, including striking a motion

from calendar, or striking the complaint or answer.” Nonetheless, in each of the cases, the

plaintiff has been granted two separate extensions of time to file a motion for summary

judgment; in each of the cases, the plaintiff has been warned that no further extensions of time

would be granted absent a showing of good cause; and in each of the cases, the plaintiff has

failed to timely file a summary judgment motion even though the deadlines for doing so expired

on May 10, 2010 (see Kreisher v. Astrue, No. CIV S-09-1725 EFB, Dckt. No. 18), May 25, 2010

(see Carreira v. Astrue, No. CIV S-09-1672 EFB, Dckt. No. 19), and June 4, 2010 (see 

Burnham v. Astrue, No. CIV S-09-2054 EFB, Dckt. No. 19). 

In light of this pattern of requested extensions and missed deadlines, it is hereby

ORDERED that:

1. Each of the above-captioned plaintiffs is ordered to show cause, in writing, on or

before August 11, 2010 why her case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and why

plaintiffs and/or plaintiffs’ counsel should not be monetarily sanctioned for failure to comply

with court orders. See L.R. 110 (providing that failure to comply with the Local Rules or a court

order “may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute

or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.”). 

2. Each plaintiff shall also file a motion for summary judgment and/or remand on or

before August 11, 2010. Failure to timely file the required writings may result in dismissal and

the imposition of monetary sanctions. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 

////

////

////

Case 2:09-cv-01725-EFB Document 19 Filed 07/12/10 Page 2 of 3
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

3

3. Further, plaintiffs’ counsel is ordered to appear in person on August 25, 2010 at 10:00

a.m. in Courtroom No. 24 for a hearing regarding this order to show cause. 

SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 12, 2010.

Case 2:09-cv-01725-EFB Document 19 Filed 07/12/10 Page 3 of 3