Opinion
2:20-cv-04166-SHK
01-16-2024
E.F.P. v. Martin J. O'Malley, Comm'r of Soc. Sec'y
Present: The Honorable Shashi H. Kewalramani, United States Magistrate Judge
CIVIL MINUTES-GENERAL
Proceedings (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
The Court received and reviewed Plaintiff's Notice of Motion and Motion for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) (“Motion”), filed December 27, 2023. Electronic Case Filing Number (“ECF No.”) 23, Motion. A review of Plaintiff's Motion reveals that Plaintiff has failed to lodge a proposed order with the Motion in violation of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for the United States District Court for the Central District of California (“Local Rule” or “L.R.”). See L.R. 7-20 (“A separate proposed order shall be lodged with any motion or application requiring an order of the Court, pursuant to L.R. 52-4.1. Unless exempted from electronic filing pursuant to L.R. 5-4.2, each proposed order shall comply with L.R. 5-4.4.”); see also L.R. 52-4.1 (“A separate proposed order shall be submitted with any stipulation, application, motion, or request of the parties requiring an order of the court . . . as provided in L.R. 5-4.4.”); L.R. 5-4.4.1 (“When a proposed order or other proposed document accompanies an electronic filing, the proposed order or other proposed document shall be in PDF format and included, as an attachment, with the main electronically filed document”).
Consequently, Plaintiff is ordered to show cause by January 30, 2024, why Plaintiff's Motion should not be denied for failure to comply with the Local Rules. Plaintiff can satisfy this order by filing a proposed order that complies with the Local Rules by the above stated date. Plaintiff is warned that failure to timely satisfy this order may result in Plaintiff's Motion being denied for failure to prosecute and follow Court orders.
IT IS SO ORDERED.