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)
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?