Segura v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 23

ORDER Directing Clerk of Court to Transfer Case, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 12/10/18. CASE TRANSFERRED to Central District of CA. (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

GRACIELA SEGURA,

10
11
12
13
14

Plaintiff,
v.

No. 1:17-cv-01559-GSA
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT
TO TRANSFER CASE TO THE
U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
(Doc. 22)
Respondent.

15
16
On November 20, 2017, Plaintiff Graciela Segura 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. Although the complaint alleges that Plaintiff is a resident of
20
21

Patterson, California (Doc.1, ¶1), Plaintiff’s actual residence address is 16382 Vine Street,
Hesperia, San Bernardino County, California. AR 211. Plaintiff’s Patterson address is a mailing

22
address only. AR 211.
23
A claimant of Social Security benefits whose application has been denied by the
24

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

25
judicial district in which the plaintiff resides, or has his principal place of business or, if he does
26
not reside or have his principal place of business within any such judicial district, in the United
27
28

1

1

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

2

in Hesperia, California, this Court must transfer venue to the proper district.

3

On November 20, 2018, this Court issued an order to show cause why this case should not

4

be transferred to the Central District of California. AR 22. The order provided that Plaintiff

5

could challenge or consent to the transfer of venue by providing a written response on or before

6

December 7, 2019. AR 22. If Plaintiff did not file a timely written response, the Court would

7

transfer the above-captioned case to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

8

AR 22. Plaintiff did not file a written response to the order to show cause.

9
10

Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is hereby DIRECTED to transfer the above-captioned
case to the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

December 10, 2018

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2