Huggins v. Social Security Administration

Filing 25

ORDER Directing the Plaintiff to file his opening brief within 14 days from the date this order is served or face a recommendation of dismissal for failure to comply with a Court order. ( Brief due by 10/3/2018.) Signed by Magistrate Judge G. R. Smith on 9/19/18. (jrb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
DAVID LEE HUGGINS,
Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)

FILED
Scott L. Poff, Clerk
United States District Court

By jburrell at 1:05 pm, Sep 19, 2018

CV417-054

)
)
)
)
)

ORDER
Plaintiff filed his Complaint seeking review of a final decision of the
Commissioner of Social Security and motion to proceed in forma
pauperis (IFP) in March 2017. Docs. 1 & 2. After his Complaint was
approved for service on the Commissioner, plaintiff was served with this
Court’s General Order in Social Security Appeals setting forth the
briefing schedule and requirements to which all Social Security appeal
plaintiffs (whether pro se or represented by counsel) must adhere.
Doc. 4. The Court ordered plaintiff to explain his failure to comply with
that Order, which required him to file his opening brief explaining his
entitlement to relief within 30 days of the filing of the Administrative
Record and filing of defendant’s Answer to the Complaint. Doc. 23.

Plaintiff responded with another letter complaining that he has
been unable to find an attorney to write his opening brief for him.
Doc. 23 at 1.

He also reiterates his complaints that he cannot work

because of his various impairments, and recapitulates his educational
and employment history.

Id.

That summary does not, however,

demonstrate any error in the Administrative Law Judge’s written denial
of benefits. At most, he alleges that his “physical ability is not as good as
Social Security feels.”

Id.

But to have this Court review the

Commissioner’s decision, there must be something more than “they got
it wrong.” As set forth in this Court’s General Order, plaintiff must:
(a) State the issues presented for review, set forth in separate
numbered paragraphs. In other words -- what did the ALJ get
wrong?
(b) Briefly summarize his mental and physical impairments and the
medical evidence supporting those impairments, with references to
the pages of the Administrative Record where that medical
evidence may be found. Meaning -- what evidence did the ALJ have
before him when he denied benefits?
(c) Separately and clearly set forth his argument regarding each
issue, with specific reference to the portion of the record relied
upon and by citations to statutes, regulations, and cases. Or, how
did the ALJ get it wrong?
See doc. 4 at 2. Plaintiff apparently wishes to continue to prosecute his
case. See doc. 23. But without any indication of how plaintiff believes
2

the Commissioner erred in denying him benefits, the Court can do
nothing for him.
Within 14 days of the date this Order is served, plaintiff is
DIRECTED to file his opening brief complying with the above or face a
recommendation of dismissal for failure to comply with a Court order.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); S.D. Ga. L.R. 41.1(c).; Link v. Wabash R.R. Co.,
370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (courts have the inherent authority to
dismiss claims for lack of prosecution); Mingo v. Sugar Cane Growers Coop, 864 F.2d 101, 102 (11th Cir. 1989); Jones v. Graham, 709 F.2d 1457,
1458 (11th Cir. 1983); Floyd v. United States, CV491-277 (S.D. Ga. June
10, 1992).
SO ORDERED, this 19th day of September, 2018.

3