Goldstein v. Colvin

Filing 13

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd denying 7 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; denying 9 , 10 Motions for Reversal Order. Plaintiff given until 5/30/2014 to properly effect service. (hrllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/21/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN JOSE DIVISION United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 STEVEN M. GOLDSTEIN, Case No. 5:13-cv-03504 HRL Plaintiff, 13 ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT AND FOR REVERSAL ORDER v. 14 15 16 CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration and the Social Security Administration, Defendants. 17 18 [Re: Dkt. Nos. 7, 9, 10] Pro se plaintiff Steven M. Goldstein filed this action, seeking judicial review of a Social 19 Security Administration decision re benefits. Pending before the court is his “Rule 12 Motion for 20 Judgment on the Pleadings” in which he says he is entitled to judgment because defendants failed 21 to respond to his complaint. (Dkt. 7). Plaintiff subsequently filed a “Motion for Hearing, Amend, 22 and Request for Reversal Order Issued to The Social Security Administration” (Dkt. 9), followed 23 several weeks later by a second “Motion for Hearing, Amend, and Request for Reversal Order 24 Issued to The Social Security Administration” (Dkt. 10). These latter two motions argue that 25 plaintiff is entitled to judgment on the merits and appear to be an effort by plaintiff to supplement 26 his first motion. 27 28 Having reviewed plaintiff’s motions and the record in this case, this court concludes that 1 all of the motions should be denied because service has not been properly effected. 1 The record 2 presented indicates that plaintiff prepared a single summons directed only to “Social Security 3 Administration Office of the General Counsel” at an address in San Francisco, California and then 4 sent the complaint and summons by certified mail to that address and to the U.S. Attorney General 5 at an address in Washington, D.C. (Dkt. 4). That does not satisfy the requirements for service 6 under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i). Among other things, there is no indication that plaintiff served a 7 summons and complaint on “the United States attorney for the district where the action is brought 8 . . ..” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1)(A)(i). Inasmuch as the time for service has expired, plaintiff will be 9 given additional time until May 30, 2014 in which to properly effect service on defendant. Fed. R. 10 Civ. P. 4(m). As for plaintiff’s second and third motions, they were not properly noticed in compliance United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 with Civil Local Rule 7-2(a). Moreover, unless the court orders otherwise, matters brought for 13 judicial review of administrative decisions by the Social Security Administration are deemed 14 submitted for decision without oral argument. (Dkt. 2, Procedural Order for Social Security 15 Review Actions). In any event, it would be premature to enter judgment on the merits before 16 defendants properly have been served. To the extent he has not already done so, plaintiff is strongly encouraged to contact the 17 18 Federal Legal Assistance Self-Help Center (FLASH), located on the second floor of the Federal 19 Courthouse in San Jose. Appointments with FLASH may be made by signing up at the Center or 20 by calling 408-297-1480. 2 21 SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: April 21, 2014 23 ______________________________________ HOWARD R. LLOYD UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 24 25 26 27 28 1 Contrary to plaintiff’s assertions, the filing of his executed summons (Dkt. 4) was a perfunctory act by the Clerk’s Office and not an indication that the court had actually considered the propriety of service. 2 Additionally, plaintiff is admonished to stop calling chambers with respect to matters pending before the court. See, e.g., Civ. L.R. 11-4(c). 2 1 2 5:13-cv-03504-HRL Notice has been electronically mailed to: Steven Michael Goldstein 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?