Charlson v. Commissioner Social Security Administration
Filing
9
OPINION & ORDER: Plaintiff's action is Dismissed without prejudice. A final judgment shall be prepared. Signed on 10/9/13 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (gm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
EDWARD THOMAS CHARLSON,
Plaintiff,
3:13-CV-1430-PK
OPINION AND
ORDER
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION,
Defendant.
SIMON, District Judge:
Plaintiffprose Edward Thomas Charlson filed this action, by and through which
Charlson appears to intend to seek review of a denial of social security benefits, against an
unspecified defendant on August 13, 2013. Because Charslon's complaint does not identify any
defendant, on August 15,2013, Judge Papak directed the clerk to mail Charlson a "proper form
Page 1 - OPINION AND ORDER
of Amended Complaint for Judicial Review of Decision by Commissioner of Social Security
along with a copy of the Courts Guide for Self-Represented Parties," and provided Charlson until
August 30,2013, to file a "proper Amended Complaint for Judicial Review of Decision by
Commissioner of Social Security" f01mally identifYing his intended defendant. Docket No. 6.
The form Amended Complaint was sent to Charlson that same day. See Docket No. 8.
As of the date hereof, Charlson has not filed any new pleading or otherwise attempted to
cure the deficiencies identified in Judge Papak's Order dated August 15, 2013. Because Charlson
has not filed any pleading properly identifYing any defendant, notwithstanding Judge Papak's
clear direction that he do so, Charlson's action is dismissed without prejudice for failure to
prosecute.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, Charlson's action is dismissed without prejudice. A final
judgment shall be prepared.
DATED this 9th day of October, 2013.
Honorable Michael H. Simon
United States District Judge
Page 2 - OPINION AND ORDER
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?