Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO: 1:20CV10
08-10-2020
CHARMION ANNE HOWELL, Plaintiff, v. ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant.
(KEELEY)
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On January 15, 2020, Plaintiff Charmion Anne Howell ("Plaintiff"), pro se, filed a Complaint against the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. [ECF No. 1]. Plaintiff did not pay the requisite filing fee. On the same date, the Clerk of Court sent the Plaintiff a Notice of General Guidelines for Appearing Pro Se in Federal Court and a letter regarding payment of filing fee. [ECF Nos. 2 and 3]. These filings advised Plaintiff to either submit the requisite filing fee or seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis (without prepayment of fees).
As of February 12, 2020, Plaintiff had not paid the requisite filing fee and had not filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. On the same date, the undersigned filed an Order for Plaintiff to Show Cause [ECF No. 5] as to why this action should not be dismissed. In response, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis on February 27, 2020 [ECF No. 7]. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis was granted on March 4, 2020. [ECF No. 9]. Defendant was served with a copy of Plaintiff's Complaint on or about March 6, 2020. [ECF No. 12]. Defendant filed an Answer and the Social Security Administrative Record on May 5, 2020. [ECF Nos. 14 and 15].
On May 5, 2020, the undersigned filed an Order to Comply with Local Rule, which set deadlines for the filing of the parties' Motions for Summary Judgment. [ECF No. 16]. Plaintiff received that Order on May 8, 2020. [ECF No. 17]. Pursuant to said Order, Plaintiff's Motion to Summary Judgment was due to be filed on or about June 5, 2020. Plaintiff did not file her Motion for Summary Judgment by the deadline.
On July 7, 2020, the undersigned filed another Order Show Cause. [ECF No. 18]. Plaintiff received this Order on July 11, 2020. [ECF No. 19]. In said Order, Plaintiff was given fourteen (14) days to file her Motion for Summary Judgment or to show cause why this action should not be dismissed. To date, Plaintiff has not filed anything with the Court.
As a result of the foregoing, the undersigned FINDS that Plaintiff has failed to prosecute her case as required under the statute and local rules. Accordingly, and for all of the foregoing reasons, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's Complaint [ECF No. 1] be DISMISSED for failure to prosecute.
Any party who appears pro se and any counsel of record, as applicable, may, within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation, file with the Clerk of the Court written objections identifying the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objection is made, and the basis for such objection.
A copy of such objections should be submitted to the District Judge of Record. Failure to timely file objections to the Report and Recommendation set forth above will result in waiver of the right to appeal from a judgment of this Court based upon such Report and Recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-48 (4th Cir. 1985); United States v. Schronce , 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984), cert. denied , 467 U.S. 1208 (1984); see also Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985).
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to provide a copy of this Order to any parties who appear pro se and all counsel of record, as in the Administrative Procedures for Electronic Case Filing in the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia.
DATED: 8/10/2020
/s/James P. Mazzone
JAMES P. MAZZONE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE