Evenbach v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 6

ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/30/2017 ORDERING the Clerk shall randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this matter be dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court be directed to closed this case and vacate all future dates. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

VADIM EVENBACH,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

No. 2:17-cv-02174-KJN

v.

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.

16
17

On October 18, 2017, defendant filed a notice, removing this Social Security action from

18
19

California State Court to the United States District Court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441 and

20

1442.1 (ECF No. 1.) Previously, on October 12, 2017, this matter was dismissed for lack of

21

jurisdiction by the Sacramento County Superior Court – Small Claims Division. (See ECF No. 5;

22

Case No. 17SC03292.) As a result, when defendant filed the notice of removal, there was no

23

open case to remove to federal court. Therefore, the court concludes that removal was not

24

appropriate and this matter should be dismissed without prejudice.2

25
1

26
27
28

Because plaintiff proceeds pro se, this case was referred to the undersigned pursuant to E.D.
Cal. L.R. 302(c)(21).
2

Dismissal of this case will not affect plaintiff’s ability to appeal the decision of the
Commissioner of Social Security, if such appeal is otherwise available.
1

1

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall randomly assign a

2

United States District Judge to this action, in light of the following findings and

3

recommendations.

4

Furthermore, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:

5

1. This matter be DISMISSED without prejudice.

6

2. The Clerk of Court be directed to closed this case and vacate all future dates.

7

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

8

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen (14)

9

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

10

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

11

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections

12

shall be served on all parties and filed with the court within fourteen (14) days after service of the

13

objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may

14

waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th

15

Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir. 1991).

16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED AND RECOMMENDED.
Dated: October 30, 2017

18
19
14/ss.17-2174.evenbach.F&R.dismissal

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2