Ho v. Astrue

Filing 23

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge Joseph C.Spero on 11/19/12. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(klh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/19/2012)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6
7

Plaintiff,

8

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Defendant.

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

v.

9
10

Case No. 10-01361 JCS

AMY HO,

12

On March 31, 2010, the “Procedural Order for Social Security Review Actions” of the

13
14

United States District Court for the Northern District of California was filed in the Court’s file for

15

this action and served on Plaintiff. Docket No. 3. That order required that Plaintiff serve and file

16

a motion for summary judgment or for remand within 28 days of receipt of defendant’s answer. 1

17

On December 30, 2010, Defendant Astrue, the Social Security Commissioner, filed his answer.

18

On January 21, 2011, the parties filed a joint stipulation extending the deadline for Plaintiff to file

19

her motion for summary judgment to April 29, 2011. Docket No. 14. That stipulation was

20

approved by the Court on January 24, 2011. Plaintiff failed to file her motion for summary

21

judgment by that deadline, however, and to date has not filed a motion for summary judgment.
On October 22, 2012, the Court ordered that Plaintiff file her summary judgment motion

22
23

or, in the alternative, an opposition to the motion for summary judgment that has been filed by

24

Defendant, on or before November 16, 2012 or show cause why the Court should not dismiss this

25

action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Rule 41(b). Plaintiff did not file a motion for summary

26

judgment, did not file an Opposition to Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and did not

27

respond to the order to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for failure to

28

1

The parties have consented to magistrate jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

1

pro
osecute. Acc
cordingly, th action is DISMISSED without pr
his
D
D
rejudice for f
failure to pro
osecute

2

pur
rsuant to Fed
d.R.Civ. P. 41(b).
4

3

IT IS SO ORDERE
O
ED.

4
5

Dat
ted: Novem
mber 19, 2012
2

6

___
__________
___________
___
Jos
seph C. Sper
ro
Un
nited States M
Magistrate Ju
udge

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2