From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Talley v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 7, 2011
No. C 08-04529 SI (N.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2011)

Opinion

No. C 08-04529 SI

11-07-2011

PETER C. TALLEY, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Defendant.


ORDER DENYING MOTION AS MOOT

Currently before the Court is plaintiff's motion to enforce judgment in aid of execution of judgment and for sanctions. That motion is set for hearing on November 18, 2011. Plaintiff contends that defendant refused to comply with this Court's June 2011 order awarding fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). Defendant responded to the motion on October 17, 2011, arguing that while payment of the fees was delayed due to an oversight, all fees due have been paid as of October 13, 2011. As such, defendant requests that the motion be denied.

Plaintiff's reply was due on October 24, 2011. No reply was filed, and on October 31, 2011, the Court's courtroom deputy contacted the counsel for both parties inquiring whether the motion would be withdrawn or whether plaintiff intended to keep the matter on for oral argument. As of this date, plaintiff has not filed a reply or otherwise responded to the Court's inquiry as to the status.

Having reviewed the papers submitted, the Court DENIES the motion as moot. All outstanding fees have apparently been paid. The Court will not impose sanctions on the government as the failure to pay initially was due to an oversight.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Talley v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 7, 2011
No. C 08-04529 SI (N.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2011)
Case details for

Talley v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:PETER C. TALLEY, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Nov 7, 2011

Citations

No. C 08-04529 SI (N.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2011)