Cook v. Astrue

Filing 6

ORDER DISMISSING CASE ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 7/16/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/16/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 No. C 12-2627 RS MICHAEL COOK, ORDER DISMISSING ACTION Plaintiff, v. 13 MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, 14 Defendant. ____________________________________/ 15 16 On May 24, 2012 an order issued directing plaintiff file a written brief within 30 days 17 showing, cause, if any he had, why this action should not be dismissed in light of the fact that it was 18 filed in state court in violation of the Court’s prior orders, it was filed before plaintiff received the 19 final agency decision, and it is duplicative of Case No. C 12-2336 RS. The time period for filing a 20 response has expired, and plaintiff has submitted none. Accordingly, good cause appearing, this 21 action is dismissed and the Clerk shall close the file. Plaintiff is advised that this order has no effect 22 on his pending petition for review of the Social Security Agency’s final decision regarding the 23 Supplemental Social Security Income checks that were returned to it. That matter remains pending 24 and active under Case No. C 12-2336 RS. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 Dated: 7/16/12 27 RICHARD SEEBORG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 28 1 NO. C  12‐2627 RS  1 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT A HARD COPY OF THIS ORDER WAS MAILED TO: 2 3 4 5 Michael Cook T-79529 Pelican Bay State Prison Post Office Box 7500 Crescent City, CA 95532 6 7 8 DATED: 7/16/12 9 /s/ Chambers Staff 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 Chambers of Magistrate Judge Richard Seeborg 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 NO. C  12‐2627 RS 

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?