Atkins v. Social Security Administration

Filing 56

ORDER REQUIRING REPLY RE MOTION FOR ATTYS FEES. Signed by Judge Hamilton on 7/25/12. (pjhlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/25/2012)

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5

ERMITA ATKINS,

6

Plaintiff,

7

v.

No. C 10-0180 PJH
ORDER REQUIRING REPLY RE
MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES

8
9
10
11

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner
of Social Security,
Defendant.
_________________________________/

12

On June 6, 2012, plaintiff’s current attorney, Robert Weems, filed a motion for

13

attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), to which the Commissioner responded on June

14

20, 2012. The Commissioner’s response accurately raises a number of deficiencies

15

associated with plaintiff’s motion and further notes that plaintiff’s attorney has failed to

16

provide the required documentation in support of his motion. Plaintiff failed to reply to the

17

Commissioner’s response.

18

The court’s review of the motion papers demonstrates that a reply is necessary to

19

the court’s adjudication of the motion. Absent such a reply, the court is inclined to deny the

20

motion based on the numerous deficiencies. Plaintiff is thus ORDERED to file a reply no

21

later than August 8, 2012, along with any requisite documentation, which must be properly

22

attached to a declaration or request for judicial notice in accordance with the Federal Rules

23

of Evidence. If plaintiff fails to file the reply, the motion will be DENIED with prejudice.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25

Dated: July 25, 2012

26
27
28

__________________________
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge