From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gray v. Colvin

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California
Jun 15, 2015
LA CV 13-9020 JCG (C.D. Cal. Jun. 15, 2015)

Opinion

          James Allan Gray, Plaintiff, Pro se.

          For Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant: Assistant U.S. Attorney LA-CV, LEAD ATTORNEY, AUSA - Office of U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA; Assistant U.S. Attorney LA-SSA, LEAD ATTORNEY, Office of the General Counsel for Social Security Adm., San Francisco, CA; Jennifer A Kenney, LEAD ATTORNEY, SAUSA - Social Security Administration, Office of the General Counsel - Social Security Adm, San Francisco, CA.


          Present: The Honorable Jay C. Gandhi, United States Magistrate Judge.

          PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND/OR COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS

          The Honorable Jay C. Gandhi, United States Magistrate Judge.

         On April 21, 2015, the Court granted James Allan Gray (" Plaintiff")'s former counsel's motion to withdraw as attorney of record, and stayed this action for 45 calendar days, so that Plaintiff could secure successor counsel. [Dkt. No. 18.] The Court ordered the parties to submit a joint report to the Court regarding the status of this action on or before June 5, 2015. [ Id. ]

         On June 5, 2015, Defendant filed a status report stating that she had attempted to contact Plaintiff by telephone, without success, on May 28, June 1, and June 5, 2015, and had sent Plaintiff a letter by overnight mail on June 1, 2015. [Dkt. No. 19.] Plaintiff did not respond to Defendant's letter. [ Id. ]

         Pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a district court may sua sponte dismiss an action for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with a court order. See Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-32, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962). Here, Plaintiff failed to participate in the submission of a joint status report, as directed by the Court's April 21, 2015 Order. [ See Dkt. No. 18.]

         Accordingly, within fourteen days of the date of this Order, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE -- that is, to explain, in writing, why he failed to participate in the submission of a joint status report to the Court.

         Plaintiff is warned that his failure to timely respond to this Order may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute and/or failure to comply with court orders, pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

         Additionally, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to send a copy of this Order to Plaintiff's last known address, as represented by Plaintiff's former counsel, [ see Dkt. No. 15 at 7], as well as to the most recent address reflected in the Certified Administrative Record, [ see Dkt. No. 14-3 at 3.].

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Gray v. Colvin

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California
Jun 15, 2015
LA CV 13-9020 JCG (C.D. Cal. Jun. 15, 2015)
Case details for

Gray v. Colvin

Case Details

Full title:James Allan Gray v. Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California

Date published: Jun 15, 2015

Citations

LA CV 13-9020 JCG (C.D. Cal. Jun. 15, 2015)