Velardi v. Astrue

Filing 14

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 1 Complaint : The Magistrate Recommends that the District Court, after independent review of the record, issue an order to show cause and, if cause is not established, dismiss this action with prejudice.**** SEE ATTACHED PDF FOR FURTHER INFORMATION*******. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline J Marshall on 02/09/09. (LMF, )

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 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Michael J. Astrue, ) ) ) Defendant. ______________________________________ ) Glenn Velardi, CV 07-627 TUC-RCC (JM) REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

In the Scheduling Order, Plaintiff was ordered to file any desired motions within 30 days of the filing of the answer. Docket No. 8. Plaintiff has failed to do so and has not requested a time extension. Plaintiff was warned, "[a]bsent any pending dispositive motions, this case may be dismissed as prescribed in Local Rule LRCiv. 41.1 Rule of Practice." Id. Local Rule Civil 41.1 allows for the dismissal for want of prosecution an action in which there have been "no proceedings for six (6) or more months . . ." No action has occurred in this case in more than six months and the required motions have not been filed. Based on the foregoing and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Rule 72.1 1.17(d)(2), of the Local Rules ­ Civil of the United States District Court, District of Arizona, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the District Court, after an independent review of the record, issue an order to show cause and, if cause is not established, dismiss this action with prejudice. This Recommendation is not an order that is immediately appealable to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Any notice of appeal pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, should not be filed until entry of the District Court's judgment.

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

However, the parties shall have ten (10) days from the date of service of a copy of this recommendation within which to file specific written objections with the District Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Rules 72(b), 6(a) and 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Thereafter, the parties have ten (10) days within which to file a response to the objections. If any objections are filed, this action should be designated case number: CV 07-627-TUCRCC. Failure to timely file objections to any factual or legal determination of the Magistrate Judge may be considered a waiver of a party's right to de novo consideration of the issues. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). DATED this 9th day of February, 2009.

2