(SS) John v. Commissioner of Social Security ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMIE RACHELLE JOHN, ) Case No.: 1:19-cv-1148- JLT ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER TO PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE ) WHY THE ACTION SHOULD NOT BE 13 v. ) ) DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH 14 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, ) THE COURT’S ORDER AND FAILURE TO ) PROSECUTE 15 Defendant. ) ) 16 17 Plaintiff seeks judicial review of the decision to deny her application for Social Security 18 benefits. (Doc. 1) On March 9, 2020, the Court ordered Plaintiff to serve a confidential letter brief upon 19 the Commissioner of Social Security within thirty days, and to file a proof of service with the Court. 20 (Doc. 15 at 2) Thus, Plaintiff was to serve the brief and file a proof of service no later than April 13, 2- 21 2-. To date, Plaintiff has not filed a proof of service, and did not request an extension of time to 22 comply with the deadline. 23 The Local Rules, corresponding with Fed. R. Civ. P. 11, provide: “Failure of counsel or of a 24 party to comply with . . . any order of the Court may be grounds for the imposition by the Court of any 25 and all sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” Local Rule 110. “District courts have 26 inherent power to control their dockets,” and in exercising that power, a court may impose sanctions 27 including dismissal of an action. Thompson v. Housing Authority of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 28 (9th Cir. 1986). A court may dismiss an action with prejudice, based on a party’s failure to prosecute 1 an action or failure to obey a court order, or failure to comply with local rules. See, e.g. Ferdik v. 2 Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (dismissal for failure to comply with an order); 3 Malone v. U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987) (dismissal for failure to comply with 4 a court order); Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986) (dismissal for failure to 5 prosecute and to comply with local rules). 6 Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED to show cause within fourteen days of the date of service 7 of this order why terminating sanctions should not be imposed for failure to follow the Court’s order 8 and failure to prosecute the action or to serve a confidential letter brief and file proof of service with 9 the Court. 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 Dated: April 21, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 13 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28