Ivy v. Commissioner of Social Security

Full title: WILLIE IVY, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

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

Date published: Apr 8, 2011

CIV S-10-0953-CMK (E.D. Cal. Apr. 8, 2011)

Opinion

WILLIE IVY, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. No. CIV S-10-0953-CMK. United States District Court, E.D. California. April 8, 2011.

          ORDER

          CRAIG M. KELLISON, Magistrate Judge.

         Plaintiff, who is proceeding with retained counsel, brings this action for judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). A review of the docket reflects that defendant has notified the court regarding consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff, however, has not notified the court regarding consent. Pursuant to the court's scheduling order and Eastern District of California Local Rules, Appendix A, the time to do so has now expired.

         Plaintiff shall show cause in writing, within 30 days of the date of this order, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to inform the court regarding consent to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction, as required by the court's scheduling order. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve on plaintiff a copy of the court's form entitled "Consent to Assignment or Request for Reassignment." Plaintiff is warned that failure to respond to this order may result in the dismissal of the action for the reasons discussed above, as well as for failure to prosecute and comply with court rules and orders. See Local Rule 110.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.