Sanchez v. Colvin

Filing 18

ORDER re 17 Order to Show Cause. Failure to respond to the order forthwith will result in dismissal of this case on September 28, 2015. See attached order. Signed by Judge Sarah A. L. Merriam on 9/14/2015.(Esposito, A.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
------------------------------x
:
CARMEN SANCHEZ on behalf of
:
J.J.S.
:
:
v.
:
:
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING
:
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
:
SECURITY and SOCIAL
:
SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
:
:
------------------------------x

Civ. No. 3:15CV00306(SALM)

September 14, 2015

ORDER
Plaintiff, represented by counsel, filed this action on
March 3, 2015. [Doc. #1] On March 3, 2015, Judge Holly B.
Fitzsimmons entered the Standing Scheduling Order in Social
Security Cases, which establishes, inter alia, the following
deadline:
Within 60 Days after the filing of the Answer, the
plaintiff must serve and file a Motion for Order
Reversing the Commissioner’s Decision, or for other
relief, and a supporting memorandum.
[Doc. #3 ¶I(c)]. Defendant Carolyn W. Colvin (“defendant”) filed
her answer to the complaint on June 1, 2015. [Doc. #13]

On June

2, 2015, this Court entered a Scheduling Order directing
plaintiff to file a Motion to Reverse and/or Remand by July 31,
2015 [Doc. #14] On July 31, 2015, the day the motion was due,
plaintiff filed a First Motion for Extension of Time, seeking
1

until August 31, 2015, to file a motion. [Doc. #15] The
extension was granted absent objection and a revised scheduling
order was entered. [Doc. #16] The Court added that it did “not
anticipate granting any further extensions of time.” Id.
No motion was filed by the plaintiff on or before August
31, 2015. On September 8, 2015, an order entered directing
plaintiff to show cause by September 11, 2015, why she failed to
file her Motion to Reverse and/or Remand by August 31, 2015.
[Doc. #17] As of this date, plaintiff has not filed a Motion to
Reverse and/or Remand or responded to the Order to Show Cause.
Rule 41(a) of the Local Rules of this District provides:
In civil actions in which no action has been taken by
the parties for six (6) months or in which deadlines
established by the Court pursuant to Rule 16 appear
not to have been met, the Clerk shall give notice of
proposed dismissal to counsel of record and pro se
parties, if any. If such notice has been given and no
action has been taken in the action in the meantime
and no satisfactory explanation is submitted to the
Court within twenty (20) days thereafter, the Clerk
shall enter a judgment. Any such judgment entered by
the Clerk under this Rule may be suspended, altered or
rescinded by the Court for cause shown.
D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 41(a) (emphasis added).
The plaintiff shall provide a “satisfactory explanation”
for her failure to meet the deadlines by the Court forthwith, or
this case will be dismissed on September 28, 2015, that is, 20

2

days after the entry of the Order to Show Cause.
SO ORDERED at New Haven, Connecticut this 14th day of
September, 2015.
/s/ _________________________
HON. SARAH A. L. MERRIAM
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3