(SS) Magana v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 11

ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANT to SHOW CAUSE Why Sanctions Should Not Be Imposed for Failure to Lodge Administrative Record, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 8/2/2022. Show Cause Response due by 8/8/2022.(Hall, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 MIREYA MAGANA, Plaintiff, 11 12 13 14 Case No. 1:21-cv-01100-BAK ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANT TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR FAILURE TO LODGE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. (ECF No. 10) DEADLINE: AUGUST 8, 2022 15 16 17 On July 19, 2021, Plaintiff Mireya Magana filed this action seeking judicial review of a 18 final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying an 19 application for disability benefits pursuant to the Social Security Act. (ECF No. 1.) On April 20 1, 2022, the Court issued an order advising the parties of the lifting of the stay of action 21 pursuant to General Order Number 644, which rescinded the Court’s temporary stay in Social 22 Security Matters effective April 1, 2022, and provided an amended scheduling order. (ECF No. 23 10.) Pursuant to the amended scheduling order, Defendant was directed to electronically file 24 the administrative record within 120 days of service of the Court’s order. (Id. at 2.) Thus, the 25 deadline to file the administrative record was August 1, 2022. However, an independent 26 review of the docket reveals that, as of August 1, 2022, neither the administrative record, nor 27 other filings, have been submitted. 28 Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these 1 1 Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all 2 sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” The Court has the inherent power to 3 control its docket and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate, 4 including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 5 2000). 6 Defendant’s failure to timely lodge the administrative record constitutes a failure to 7 comply with the Court’s order. Accordingly, Defendant will be directed to show cause why 8 sanctions should not issue for failure to lodge the administrative record in compliance with the 9 Court’s April 1, 2022 order (ECF No. 10). 10 Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that no later than August 8, 2022, 11 Defendant shall show cause in writing why sanctions should not issue for the failure to comply 12 with the Court’s orders and timely lodge the administrative record in this matter. Failure to 13 comply with this order will result in the imposition of sanctions. 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 Dated: August 2, 2022 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?