Lottie Coles v. Carolyn W Colvin
Filing
17
Order to Show Cause Why Action Should Not Be Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute and Comply With Court Orders by Magistrate Judge Kenly Kiya Kato. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 5/25/2015. (dts)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.
EDCV 14-1488-KK
Title
Lottie Coles v. Carolyn W. Colvin
Present: The
Honorable
Date
May 18, 2015
Kenly Kiya Kato, United States Magistrate Judge
Deb Taylor
None
None
Deputy Clerk
Court Reporter / Recorder
Tape No.
Attorneys Present for Plaintiff:
Attorneys Present for Defendant:
None Present
None Present
Proceedings:
(In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Why Action Should Not Be
Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute and Comply With Court Orders
I.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On July 21, 2014, Plaintiff Lottie Coles lodged a complaint challenging the denial
of her applications for Title II Disability Insurance Benefits and Title XVI Supplemental
Security Income by the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. ECF No. 11.
On July 23, 2014, the Court issued a Case Management Order (“CMO”) setting
forth dates for, among other things, the preparation and filing of the parties’ Joint
Stipulation. ECF No. 2.
On December 22, 2014, pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, the Court continued the
dates contained in the CMO. ECF No. 13. The Court, therefore, ordered the parties to
file their Joint Stipulation on or before May 7, 2015. Id. As of this date, the parties have
not filed their Joint Stipulation.
CV-90 (06/04)
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.
EDCV 14-1488-KK
Date
Title
May 18, 2015
Lottie Coles v. Carolyn W. Colvin
II.
DISCUSSION
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), the Court may dismiss an action with
prejudice for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with any court order. See Fed. R.
Civ. P. 41(b).
Here, Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s order regarding the timely
filing of the Joint Stipulation in this matter. Thus, having failed to comply with the
Court’s CMO, the Court may properly dismiss the instant action under Rule 41(b).
However, before dismissing this action, the Court will afford Plaintiff an opportunity to
explain her failure to file the Joint Stipulation as directed by the CMO.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing, why this
action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and/or comply with court orders.
Plaintiff shall have up to and including May 25, 2015, to respond to this Order. Plaintiff
is cautioned that failure to timely file a response to this Order will be deemed by the
Court consent to the dismissal of this action with prejudice.
CV-90 (06/04)
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Page 2 of 2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?