Escobedo v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Larry Alan Burns (author)
Analysis
Plaintiff Victoria Escobedo, proceeding pro se, failed to file her merits brief in a Social Security disability appeal despite multiple extensions and a final warning from the magistrate judge. The court dismissed the action for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Dismissal of the action for failure to prosecute“In light of Escobedo’s repeated failure to meet court-imposed deadlines, this action is DISMISSED for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).” | agree with court The court applied the correct procedural mechanism (Rule 41(b)) for dismissal due to failure to prosecute. The record indicates the plaintiff was given multiple opportunities to comply, including a specific extension and a final warning that non-compliance would result in dismissal. Dismissing a pro se litigant for repeated failure to prosecute after adequate notice and opportunity is a standard and appropriate exercise of the court's inherent and rule-based authority to manage its docket. |
The order itself: sound — The order is concise but legally sufficient. It recites the specific procedural history (missed deadlines, extension granted, final warning) and cites the correct rule (Rule 41(b)) and a relevant Ninth Circuit authority supporting the dismissal. The reasoning directly connects the plaintiff's conduct to the legal consequence.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10
11 VICTORIA ESCOBEDO, Case No.: 19cv869-LAB (AHG) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL 13 v. 14 ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of 15 Social Security, Defendant. 16 17 On July 15, 2019, Plaintiff Victoria Escobedo, proceeding pro se and in forma 18 pauperis, filed an amended civil complaint against Defendant Andrew M. Saul, 19 Commissioner of Social Security, seeking judicial review of the denial of her application for 20 social security disability and supplemental security income benefits. ECF No. 6. Pursuant 21 to a briefing schedule set by Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard, Escobedo was to file her 22 merits brief no later than February 11, 2020. ECF No. 20. When she failed to file her brief 23 by that date, Judge Goddard directed Escobedo to show cause why the case should not be 24 dismissed for failure to prosecute. ECF No. 21. Escobedo responded that she was relying 25 a friend to help file her papers, and that neither she nor her friend had knowledge of the law. 26 ECF No. 23. Finding good cause, Judge Goddard granted Escobedo an extension to file 27 her merits brief through April 17, 2020. ECF No. 24. Escobedo again missed the deadline. 28 On April 21, 2020, Judge Goddard issued a final order instructing Escobedo to file her merits 1 || brief by May 12, 2020 or face dismissal of her action. The deadline has again come and 2 || gone, but Escobedo has still not filed her merits brief. 3 In light of Escobedo’s repeated failure to meet court-imposed deadlines, this action 4 || is DISMISSED for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). See 5 || also In re Wright, 659 F. App'x 438, 439 (9th Cir. 2016) (affirming a district court’s dismissal 6 || for failure to prosecute where the district court warned the party that failure to file a brief 7 || would result in dismissal). The clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the 8 || case. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 || Dated: May 13, 2020 (ym / A (Boy WV 11 HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS 42 Chief United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28