Davis v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 19

ORDER Requiring Commissioner of Social Security to File a Copy of the Administrative Record That Complies With the Scheduling Order Within Fifteen (15) Days signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 5/16/2017. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RYAN ALLEN DAVIS, Plaintiff, 12 13 14 v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Case No. 1:16-cv-00777-SAB ORDER REQUIRING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY TO FILE A COPY OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD THAT COMPLIES WITH THE SCHEDULING ORDER (ECF No. 10) 15 Defendant. 16 17 18 This action was filed on June 3, 2016. On June 6, 2016, the scheduling order issued 19 requiring “The administrative record shall only be filed electronically and, to the extent 20 practicable, provided in Optical Character Recognition (“OCR”) format.” (ECF No. 5 at 21 2:5-8 (emphasis in original).) It has recently come to the Court’s attention that beginning around 22 October 2016, as in this action, the administrative records were often not filed in OCR format in 23 Social Security cases as required by the scheduling order. The Court shall require the 24 Commissioner to file a copy of the administrative record in OCR format in this action and to 25 verify that the transcript in all Social Security actions pending before the undersigned have been 26 filed in OCR format. 27 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within fifteen days from the date of 28 service of this order, the Commissioner shall file a copy of the administrative record in OCR 1 1 format in this action, and shall verify that the transcripts in all actions pending before the 2 undersigned have been filed in the correct format. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 Dated: May 16, 2017 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?