(SS) Baylor v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 2:2012cv01056 - Document 11 (E.D. Cal. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 11/16/12 ORDERING that the Clerk of Court randomly select and assign a United States District Judge to this case; Plaintiff's counsel shall immediately se rve a copy of this order and findings and recommendations on plaintiff by mail at his last known address and by e-mail at his last known e-mail address, if any; and RECOMMENDING that the case be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute; The Clerk of Court be directed to vacate all dates and close this case. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Becknal, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(SS) Baylor v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LEONARD BAYLOR, 11 Plaintiff, v. 12 13 No. 2:12-cv-1056 KJN COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 Defendant. / 15 Plaintiff, who is represented by counsel, commenced this action on April 20, 16 17 2012. (Dkt. No. 1.) On May 9, 2012, the undersigned granted plaintiff’s application to proceed 18 in forma pauperis, and directed plaintiff to submit copies of the required service documents to 19 the United States Marshal (and file a statement with the court that such documents have been 20 submitted to the United States Marshal) within fourteen (14) days of that order. (Dkt. No. 6 at 21 2.) Plaintiff failed to file the required statement and failed to submit the service documents to 22 the U.S. Marshal in accordance with the court’s order. The court’s May 9, 2012 scheduling order in this matter expressly states that 23 24 failure to adhere to scheduling deadlines “may result in sanctions, including dismissal. L.R. 110. 25 Plaintiff has an affirmative duty to prosecute this action, and failure to do so may result in a 26 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 dismissal for lack of prosecution. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Requests to modify this order must be 2 made by written motion.” (Dkt. No. 8 at 3-4.) 3 Consequently, on November 1, 2012, the court issued an order to show cause 4 (“OSC”) directing plaintiff, within fourteen (14) days, to show cause in writing why this case 5 should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court orders. The 6 court cautioned plaintiff that failure to timely file the required writing would result in a 7 recommendation that the action be dismissed with prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. 8 Cal. L.R. 110; see also Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 9 (9th Cir. 2005) (recognizing that a court may dismiss an action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 10 Procedure 41(b) sua sponte for a plaintiff’s failure to prosecute or comply with the rules of civil 11 procedure or the court’s orders). On November 14, 2012, plaintiff’s counsel filed a response to the OSC. (Dkt. 12 13 No. 10.) Plaintiff’s counsel explained that his failure to submit the required service documents 14 to the U.S. Marshal was the result of an inability to contact or meet with plaintiff to complete the 15 intake process for representation. (Id. ¶ 2.) Plaintiff’s counsel conducted an initial phone 16 interview with plaintiff and completed the application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Id. ¶ 3.) 17 However, despite multiple attempts, plaintiff’s counsel has been unable to reach plaintiff since 18 then, and he does not have an executed retainer agreement from plaintiff. (Id. ¶ 4.) Accordingly, 19 plaintiff’s counsel asserts that he does not believe that he can proceed with prosecuting this 20 matter. (Id.) In light of plaintiff’s counsel’s representations, it appears that plaintiff has 21 22 abandoned prosecution of the case. The court therefore recommends that the action be dismissed 23 without prejudice. 24 //// 25 //// 26 //// 2 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Clerk of Court randomly select and assign a United States District Judge 3 4 to this case. 2. Plaintiff’s counsel shall immediately serve a copy of this order and findings 5 and recommendations on plaintiff by mail at his last known address and by e-mail at his last 6 known e-mail address, if any. 7 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that: 8 1. The case be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Federal Rule 9 of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. 10 2. The Clerk of Court be directed to vacate all dates and close this case. 11 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 12 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 13 (14) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 14 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 15 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections 16 shall be served on all parties and filed with the court within fourteen (14) days after service of 17 the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 18 may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 19 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir. 1991). 20 21 IT IS SO ORDERED AND RECOMMENDED. DATED: November 16, 2012 22 23 24 25 _____________________________________ KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 26 3
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
