Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 EUREKA DIVISION 7 8 DAVID SMITH, Case No. 18-cv-07798-RMI
9 Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING SECOND
10 v. MOTION TO DISMISS
11 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL Re: Dkt. No. 21
SECURITY,
12 Defendant. 13 14 Now pending before the court is Defendant’s Second Motion to Dismiss (dkt. 21) 15 Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) (dkt. 20) for failure to timely file. The court granted 16 Plaintiff’s request that his FAC serve as his response (dkt. 25), and Defendant has replied (dkt. 17 26). Both parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge (dkts. 3 & 11). For the 18 reasons stated below, the court grants the motion without leave to amend. 19 BACKGROUND 20 On June 24, 2015, Plaintiff protectively filed for disability benefits under Titles II and XVI 21 alleging a disability onset date of June 30, 2014. See Voegle Decl. Ex. 1 (dkt. 21-1) at 9. On 22 January 30, 2018, the administrative law judge…