(SS) Ramirez v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 1:2015cv01227 - Document 6 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that this Action be DISMISSED, Without Prejudice, for Plaintiff's Failure to Pay the Filing Fee or Submit an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis in Compliance WIth the Court's Order re 1 Social Security Complaint signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 9/14/2015. Referred to Judge O'Neill. Objections to F&R due within ten (10) days. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 VINCENT YSARRARAS RAMIREZ, 9 Plaintiff, 10 11 12 Case No. 1:15-cv-01227-LJO-SAB FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DISMISSING ACTION FOR FAILURE TO SUBMIT APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS OR PAY FILING FEE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. (ECF No. 3) TEN DAY DEADLINE 13 14 15 I. 16 BACKGROUND 17 On August 10, 2015, Plaintiff Vincent Ysarraras Ramirez (“Plaintiff”) proceeding pro se 18 in this action, filed a complaint challenging the final decision of the Commissioner of Social 19 Security denying him disability benefits. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff also filed a motion to proceed in 20 forma pauperis in this action without prepayment of fees stating that he was indigent. (ECF No. 21 2.) On August 14, 2015, an order issued requiring Plaintiff to either file an application to 22 proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fee within twenty days. 23 II. 24 DISCUSSION 25 Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these 26 Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all 27 sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” The Court has the inherent power to 28 control its docket and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate, 1 1 including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2 2000). 3 A court may dismiss an action based on a party’s failure to prosecute an action, failure to 4 obey a court order, or failure to comply with local rules. See, e.g. Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 5 53-54 (9th Cir. 1995) (dismissal for noncompliance with local rule); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 6 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (dismissal for failure to comply with an order to file an amended 7 complaint); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for failure to 8 comply with local rule requiring pro se plaintiffs to keep court apprised of address); Malone v. 9 United States Postal Serv., 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987) (dismissal for failure to comply 10 with court order); Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986) (dismissal for lack 11 of prosecution and failure to comply with local rules). 12 Plaintiff was ordered to Plaintiff to either file an application to proceed in forma pauperis 13 or pay the filing fee within twenty days of the August 14, 2015 order. In the order, Plaintiff was 14 advised that failure to comply with the order would result in this action being dismissed. (ECF 15 No. 3.) More than twenty days have passed and Plaintiff has not filed the application to proceed 16 in forma pauperis, paid the filing fee in this action, or otherwise responded to the Court’s order. 17 Plaintiff has failed to comply with the order requiring him to pay the filing fee or demonstrate 18 that he is eligible to proceed without prepayment of the fee. For this reason, the Court 19 recommends that this action be dismissed. 20 III. 21 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without 23 prejudice, for Plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma 24 pauperis in compliance with the Court’s order. 25 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the district judge assigned to this 26 action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and this Court’s Local Rule 304. Within ten (10) 27 days of service of this recommendation, any party may file written objections to these findings 28 and recommendations with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be 2 1 captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The district 2 judge will review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 3 636(b)(1)(C). The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may 4 result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) 5 (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: September 14, 2015 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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.