Robb v. O'Malley

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 8 MICHAEL JAMES ROBB, Case No. 24-cv-02885-VKD 9 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY 10 v. ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED 11 MARTIN O'MALLEY, Re: Dkt. No. | Defendant. a 12 v 14 Plaintiff Michael James Robb filed this action on May 13, 2024. Dkt. No. 1. Pursuant to || the Social Security Procedural Order issued on May 14, 2024, Mr. Robb’s motion for summary || judgment or remand was due within 30 days of service of defendant Martin O’Malley’s answer. = 17 || Dkt. No. 3. Commissioner O’Malley filed an answer and the administrative record on July 12, || 2024. Dkt. No. 10. Accordingly, Mr. Robb’s motion was due no later than August 12, 2024. No || motion has been filed.

20 The Court possesses the inherent power to dismiss an action sua sponte “to achieve the || orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-33 || (1962). Mr. Robb is directed to file a written response to this order by August 23, 2024 and show || cause why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

24 IT IS SO ORDERED.

25 Dated: August 16, 2024 27 VaraiuiaE, LaMarche: > Virginia K. DeMarchi 8 United States Magistrate Judge