Barkins v. Social Security Administration

Filing 8

ORDER to Submit Additional Information. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 12/20/2011. (dmrlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/20/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
ROBERT C. BARKINS,

12
13

Plaintiff,

No. C-11-06194 DMR
ORDER TO SUBMIT ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION

v.

14

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,

15

Defendant.
___________________________________/

16
17

On December 9, 2011, Plaintiff Robert Clark Barkins filed an application to proceed in

18

forma pauperis. In response to question no. 2 on the application, Plaintiff stated that he receives SSI

19

and SSDA payments but did not indicate the amounts received. Therefore, Plaintiff is ordered to file

20

a new application to proceed in forma pauperis by no later than December 30, 2011 that provides

21

all requested information, including a complete response to question no. 2.

22

Plaintiff’s Complaint seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social

23

Security regarding a claim for SSDI benefits by Claimant Robert Barkins for a “dependent child”

24

named Kala Bryant. Plaintiff previously filed another case in this District, Case No. 11-0203-PJH,

25

Robert C. Barkins v. Social Security, regarding dependent child benefits. By no later than

26

December 30, 2011, Plaintiff is ordered to file a statement with the court indicating:

27
28

1.

The name of the child for whom Plaintiff sought benefits in the previous case;

2.

2

and
If so, why this case is different from the previous case.

UNIT
ED

S

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6
7

Dated: December 20, 2011

8

NO

DONNA M. RYU na M. Ryu
United Statese Don
Judg Magistrate Judge

RT

9

11
For the Northern District of California

ER

H

10

United States District Court

D

RDERE

OO
IT IS S

RT
U
O

5

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

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

2

R NIA

4

FO

3.

LI

3

Whether the current case involves benefits for the same child as in the previous case;

A

1

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C