(SS) Fonseca v. Commissioner of Social Security ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BERTHA FONSECA, Case No. 1:21-cv-01540-BAK 12 Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION 13 v. SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE 14 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, (ECF No. 13) 15 Defendant. FIVE DAY DEADLINE 16 17 On October 18, 2021, Plaintiff Bertha Fonseca filed this action seeking judicial review of 18 a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner” or “Defendant”) 19 denying an application for benefits pursuant to the Social Security Act. (ECF No. 1.) On March 20 2, 2022, the Court advised the parties of the lifting of the stay in this action, and ordered Plaintiff 21 to file an opening brief within forty-five (45) days of service of the March 2, 2022 order. (ECF 22 No. 13.) Accordingly, the deadline for Plaintiff to file an opening brief on their motion for 23 summary judgment, extended due to the initial date expiring on a weekend date, expired on April 24 18, 2022. Plaintiff has neither filed a brief nor requested a further extension of time to do so. 25 Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these 26 Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all 27 sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” The Court has the inherent power to control its docket and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate, 1 | including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2 | 2000). 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff SHALL SHOW CAUSE IN 4 | WRITING why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute within five (5) days 5 | of the date of service of this order. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. DAA (e_ g | Dated: _April 19, 2022 _ ef 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28