Harrell v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 23

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE why this matter should not be Transferred to the Proper Venue or Dismissed for having been filed in the wrong vicinage,signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 1/18/19. Show Cause Response due by 2/15/2019. (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

JULIE ANN HARRELL,

10
11
12
13
14

Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,

No. 1:17-cv-01503-GSA
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS
MATTER SHOULD NOT BE
TRANSFERRED TO THE PROPER
VENUE OR DISMISSED FOR HAVING
BEEN FILED IN THE WRONG VICINAGE

Respondent.

15
16
On November 8, 2017, Plaintiff Julie Ann Harrell filed a complaint seeking judicial
17
18

review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner” or
“Defendant”) denying her application for disability insurance benefits pursuant to Title II of the

19
Social Security Act. Doc. 1. The complaint alleges that Plaintiff is a resident of Lemon Cove,
20
California. Doc.1, ¶1.
21
At the agency hearing on February 9, 2016, however, Plaintiff testified that her mailing
22
address for legal purposes was 37110 Sierra Drive, Lemon Cove, California. AR 40. The ALJ
23
questioned the accuracy of this address since mail bearing the address had been returned to the
24
25
26

agency. AR 40. Plaintiff responded that the address was her mother’s home and that Plaintiff
used it instead of a “victim witness address” because she could “get to it quicker than the victim
witness address.” AR 40. Plaintiff’s telephone number bore an area code associated with thirteen

27
28

1

1

counties in North Carolina. AR 40; www.worldatlas.com/na/us/nc/area-code-919.html (accessed

2

January 16, 2019). Plaintiff testified that she was living with her children in North Carolina and

3

California. AR 41. She was receiving food stamps in North Carolina. AR 41. Plaintiff’s

4

attorney also informed the ALJ that Plaintiff had refilled her prescriptions and received North

5

Carolina nursing services since the end of 2014, but he had been unable to secure records of that

6

treatment. AR 38. The administrative record documents several North Carolina hospital visits

7

from May 2015 through December 2015. AR 1581-1600. In the May 4, 2016, hearing decision,

8

the ALJ found that “claimant moved to North Carolina last year and has had no orthopedic

9

follow-up since that time.” AR 23-24.

10

A claimant of Social Security benefits whose application has been denied by the

11

Commissioner may seek review of such decision “in the district court of the United States for the

12

judicial district in which the plaintiff resides, or has his principal place of business or, if he does

13

not reside or have his principal place of business within any such judicial district, in the United

14

States District Court for the District of Columbia.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). If Plaintiff’s residence is

15

in North Carolina this Court must transfer venue to the proper district or dismiss the case.

16

Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to file a written response to this Order to

17

Show Cause on or before February 15, 2019. Such response shall either consent to the transfer of

18

the case to the United States District Court for the appropriate district of North Carolina or show

19

cause why venue should remain with this Court. In the event that Plaintiff’s written statement has

20

not been filed before the close of business on February 15, 2019, this Court shall dismiss the case

21

for improper venue.

22
23
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

January 18, 2019

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

25
26
27
28

2