Escareno v. Social Security Administration

Filing 20

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Chief Magistrate Judge Karen B. Molzen. Show Cause Response due by 7/21/2017. (KBM)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

DENNIS G. ESCARENO,
Plaintiff,
v.

CIV 16-0847 KBM

NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
THIS MATTER is before the Court sua sponte. This Court entered its Order Setting
Briefing Schedule on May 11, 2017. Doc. 18. Pursuant to that Order, Plaintiff was to file
his Motion to Reverse or Remand on or before Tuesday, July 11, 2017. Id. The Order
further provided “[a]ll requests for extensions of time altering the deadlines set in this
Order shall be made through a motion to the Court.” Id. However, to date, Plaintiff has
neither filed a Motion, nor moved this Court for an extension of time in which to do so.
This is not the first time Plaintiff has been admonished for failing to actively
prosecute this case. See Doc. 5 (ordering Plaintiff to show cause after he failed to deliver
his Complaint to the United States Marshall Service for service on Defendant). As stated
in this Court’s previous Order to Show Cause, “[t]he Court has the inherent power to
impose a variety of sanctions on litigants in order to, among other things, regulate its
docket and promote judicial efficiency.” Id. (citing Martinez v. Internal Revenue Service,
744 F.2d 71, 73 (10th Cir. 1984)). The Court further noted that one such sanction within
the Court’s discretion is to dismiss an action for want of prosecution. Id. (citing Nat’l

Hockey League v. Metro. Hockey Club, Inc., 427 U.S. 639, 642-43 (1976); Link v.
Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30 (1962)). In addition to this Court’s inherent
powers, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure contemplate involuntary dismissal in the
event of a plaintiff’s failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 1
(requiring the Court and the parties to employ the rules to “secure the just, speedy, and
inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.” (emphasis added)).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff must either file his Motion to Remand,
or show cause in a written document to be filed with the Court no later than Friday, July
21, 2017, why this case should not be dismissed. Plaintiff is hereby notified that failure to
respond to this Order may result in dismissal of this action without further notice.

_______________________________________
UNITED STATES CHIEF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2