(SS) Alvarez v. Commissioner of Social Security

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA LUISA ALVAREZ, Case No. 1:20-cv-01207-SAB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT ISSUE FOR 13 v. PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH SEPTEMBER 30, 2020 ORDER COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, FIVE-DAY DEADLINE 15 Defendant.

17 On September 29, 2020, Plaintiff’s request for this case to be related with case no. 1:15- cv-01708-NONE-SAB, was granted and this case was reassigned to the undersigned. (ECF No. 7.) On September 30, 2020, the Court issued an order directing that the scheduling order in this action be issued and that Plaintiff serve the summons and complaint within twenty days and promptly file a proof of service. (ECF No. 8.) To date, no return of service has been filed with the Court and there is no indication that Plaintiff has requested service of the summons and complaint by the United States Marshal. (See ECF No. 4.)

24 Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all 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, including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. | 2000).

2 Accordingly, Plaintiff is HEREBY ORDERED to SHOW CAUSE in writing, within five | (5) days of the date of entry of this order, why sanctions should not issue for Plaintiff's failure to | serve the complaint in compliance with the September 30, 2020 order. Plaintiff is forewarned | that failure to respond to this order to show cause will result in the dismissal of this action for | failure to comply.

8 IT IS SO ORDERED. OF. a Se | Dated: October 23, 2020 _ ef 0 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE