Pickman v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 22

ORDER REGARDING E-FILING AND SETTING DEADLINE FOR PLAINTIFFS REPLY. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 2/24/09. (scc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 On November 11, 2008, pro se Plaintiff Leonard Pickman moved to be allowed to e-file. On November 21, 2008, the Court issued an v. MICHAEL ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. / LEONARD PICKMAN, Plaintiff, No. C 08-02762 CW ORDER REGARDING EFILING AND SETTING DEADLINE FOR PLAINTIFF'S REPLY IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

order taking the motion under submission, explaining that, in order to qualify for e-filing, Plaintiff had to file a declaration stating that he has reviewed General Order 45 and the requirements for e-filing and that he is able to comply with all the requirements for e-filing. On December 1, 2008, Plaintiff filed a

declaration stating that he reviewed General Order 45 and that he meets all the requirements for e-filing. On December 5, 2008, the On December 15, 2008, On January 13,

Court granted Plaintiff's motion to e-file.

Plaintiff filed his motion for summary judgment. 2009, Defendants e-filed their opposition.

On February 11, 2009,

Plaintiff filed a document titled, "Lack of Service of Defendant Cross-Motion For Summary Judgment," in which he states that he was not served with Defendant's opposition and, thus, he could not file his reply. On February 12, 2009, Erik Chinn, counsel for

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Defendant, filed a declaration stating that, when he learned that Plaintiff was not served with Defendant's memorandum through the ECF system, he served Plaintiff with the memorandum by first class mail. General Order 45 explains the duties and responsibilities of a party that is designated as an Electronic Case File (ECF) user, as Plaintiff requested that he be designated. However, Plaintiff has

not complied with General Order 45 because he has not registered to become an ECF user and apparently is not aware that after a case is designated for e-filing, service is accomplished through the efiling of a document. Therefore, Plaintiff is to re-read General Order 45. If he

determines that he cannot comply with its requirements, he must submit a declaration so indicating and the case will be designated as a non-e-filing case. Plaintiff must file this declaration

within one week from the date of this order. If Plaintiff does not file a declaration, he must comply with General Order 45 and register as an ECF user so that he may be assigned a user ID and password for access to the ECF system. In any event, Plaintiff's reply must be filed with the Court, either electronically or manually, within three weeks from the date of this order. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 2/24/09

CLAUDIA WILKEN united States District Judge

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Leonard Pickman 963 Diaz Lane Foster City, CA 94404 Dated: February 24, 2009 LEONARD PICKMAN, Plaintiff, v.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case Number: CV08-02762 CW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY et al, Defendant. /

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. That on February 24, 2009, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk By: Sheilah Cahill, Deputy Clerk

3