Renfro v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 10

ORDER Denying as Moot Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Erroneous Filing Docket No. 4 (ECF No. 6) signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 12/13/2016. (Valdez, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 MARC ALAN RENFRO, Plaintiff, 13 14 15 Case No. 1:16-cv-01733-SAB ORDER DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE ERRONEOUS FILING DOCKET NO. 4 v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, (ECF No. 6) Defendant. 16 17 18 Plaintiff Marc Alan Renfro (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint on November 15, 2016, along 19 with an application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF No. 2.) 20 Pursuant to a Court order, Plaintiff filed a long form application to proceed without prepayment 21 of fees (ECF No. 4) and an amended long form application to proceed without prepayment of 22 fees (ECF No. 5) on December 8, 2016. On December 9, 2016, the Court granted Plaintiff’s 23 amended long form application to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 7.) The Court also 24 directed the Clerk of the Court to terminate Plaintiff’s application to proceed without prepayment 25 of fees filed November 15, 2016 (ECF No. 2), and long form application to proceed without 26 prepayment of fees filed December 8, 2016 (ECF No. 4). On December 9, 2016, prior to the 27 Court’s order docketing, Plaintiff filed a motion to strike docket number 4 as erroneously filed. 28 (ECF No. 6.) 1 Accordingly, in light of the fact that the Court has terminated Plaintiff’s long form 1 2 application to proceed without prepayment of fees filed December 8, 2016 (ECF No. 4), IT IS 3 HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to strike erroneous filing docket no. 4 is denied as 4 moot. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: December 13, 2016 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?