Garth v. United States et al
Filing
31
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTS TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 4/2/13. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/2/2013)
1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
5
6
7
JUDY GARTH,
Plaintiff,
8
9
10
11
vs.
Case No.: 11-cv-05592-YGR
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S REQUESTS
TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of
Social Security,
Defendant.
Northern District of California
United States District Court
12
13
14
On January 23, 2013, the Court dismissed this action based on a lack of subject matter
jurisdiction. (Dkt. No. 22.) Judgment has been entered (Dkt. No. 23) and the case has been closed.
15
Since that time, Plaintiff has filed numerous motions and requests for extensions of time.
16
Plaintiff initially filed a “Notice of Motion to Vacate and Set Aside Order Granting Defendant’s
17
Motion to Dismiss; Motion for Reconsideration of Order Granting Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss;
18
Motion to Correct the Record Due to Clerical Error; Motion for Extension of Time to Resubmit and
19
Documents.” (Dkt. No. 24.) She asserted that a “court clerk clerical error” had been made and that
20
the record did not reflect documents she has filed. On February 21, 2013, Plaintiff requested 15
21
additional days to file the documents because they are not in her possession “nor does she have access
22
to them due to unforeseen circumstances and the USPS.” (Dkt. No. 25.) Without taking a position on
23
whether Plaintiff’s motions were proper, the Court granted her request for an extension of time to file
24
documents until March 8, 2013. (Dkt. No. 26.) The Court also informed Plaintiff that she may seek
25
limited legal assistance from the Federal Pro Bono Project, and provided her with its contact
26
information and office location. (Id.)
27
Plaintiff did not file the documents on March 8, and instead filed a Request for Additional
28
Time to File and Serve Missing Documents Due to Unavailability and Unforeseen Circumstances.
1
(Dkt. No. 27.) Plaintiff stated she would file the documents and her motion on March 12, 2013. On
2
March 12, 2013, Plaintiff filed an Amended/Supplemental Request for Additional time to File and
3
Serve Missing Documents Due to Unavailability and Unforeseen Circumstances. (Dkt. No. 28.)
4
Plaintiff requested until March 18 to file the documents. The Court approved Plaintiff’s request on
5
March 18, 2013 and ordered, per her request, that the documents be filed by that date.
6
Plaintiff filed a Notice to Submit Documents on March 27, 2013. (Dkt. No. 30.) Plaintiff
7
asserts that she did not receive the Court’s March 18, 2013 order until March 26, 2013 and that it was
8
a “surprise” to her because she had “no knowledge the court granted [her previous request for]
9
extension.” The Court notes that a Proof of Service in the record reflects that the March 18, 2013
10
order was sent to Plaintiff’s address on that date. (Dkt. No. 29-1.) In Plaintiff’s Notice to Submit
11
Documents, she states that she “shall” submit the documents by Friday, March 29, 2013.
Northern District of California
United States District Court
12
To date, Plaintiff has not filed the documents at issue in her requests. The Court has afforded
13
Plaintiff numerous opportunities to file the documents, without knowing the basis of the relief she
14
requests nor having received any explanation of grounds for her requests. Moreover, it is unclear to
15
the Court how documents that Plaintiff may file affects this Court’s lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
16
(See Dkt. No. 22.) For these reasons, the Court will no longer entertain Plaintiff’s attempts to seek
17
extensions of time to file the documents she claims were never docketed.
18
This Order terminates all pending motions before the Court.
19
IT IS SO ORDERED.
20
Dated: April 2, 2013
___________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?