White v. Astrue
MEMORANDUM Order Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 3/19/2013. Mailed notice by judge's staff. (srb,)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,)
11 C 8558
After Social Security claimant Larry White (“White”) had
prevailed in this action by obtaining a remand of the case to the
Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings, his
counsel filed a motion for attorney’s fees under the Equal Access
to Justice Act.
This Court acceded to a couple of requests by
the parties for extensions in the briefing process, ultimately
calling for the government’s response to be filed by February 25,
2013 and White’s reply memorandum to be filed by March 11.
Although the first two memoranda came in on time, this Court
did not receive a chambers copy of a reply by White within the
post-March 11 time frame permitted by this District Court’s
That did not mean that no reply had in fact been
filed, for unfortunately too many lawyers are either unaware of
or ignore that LR, the latter alternative perhaps being
predicated on the mistaken assumption that this Court and its
staff are somehow obligated (as we are not) to police their
In any event, this Court’s nonreceipt of the anticipated
reply led it to have the case docket printed out, and that
revealed that White had indeed filed the required reply, while at
the same time failing to honor LR 5.2(f).
With the docket
reflecting that the reply runs some 20 pages, this Court will not
impose the burden of reproduction on its staff, instead leaving
that burden where the LR places it.
Accordingly White is ordered
to deliver a chambers copy of the reply to this Court’s chambers
forthwith, accompanied by a check for $100 payable to the “Clerk
of the District Court” in accordance with the forewarning at the
very beginning of this Court’s website.
Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge
March 19, 2013
Even on that assumption, its consequence would be to
shift to this Court’s staff the burden and expense of having to
print out often lengthy documents. LR 5.2(f) was of course aimed
at avoiding that consequence.
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?