# Edwards

> District Court, E.D. Missouri · April 6, 2026

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11319789

## Case

- **Full name:** Kimberly Edwards v. Frank J. Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security Administration
- **Court:** District Court, E.D. Missouri
- **Decided:** April 6, 2026
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11319789

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

KIMBERLY EDWARDS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. 4:25-CV-01835-SRW
)
FRANK J. BISIGNANO, )
Commissioner of Social Security )
Administration, )
)
Defendant. )

MEMORANDU M AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on review of the file. The Court has jurisdiction over the
subject matter of this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The parties have consented to the exercise
of authority by the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
On December 15, 2025, self-represented Plaintiff filed a Complaint for Judicial Review of
Decision of the Commissioner of Social Security. ECF No. 1. On December 17, 2025, the Court
entered a Case Management Order setting out the briefing schedule to be followed in this case.
ECF No. 6. Plaintiff was ordered to file a Brief in Support of the Complaint within thirty (30) days
after service of the Commissioner’s certified administrative transcript. Id.
On February 9, 2026, Defendant Commissioner of Social Security filed the electronic
Certified Administrative Record and indicated it had sent a courtesy copy of the administrative
transcript to Plaintiff through the United States Mail Service. ECF No. 8. Thus, Plaintiff’s Brief in
Support of her Complaint was due no later than March 11, 2026.
On March 23, 2025, the Court reviewed the record and noticed Plaintiff had neither filed a
Brief in Support of her Complaint, nor submitted a request for additional time. Consequently, the
Court directed Plaintiff to show cause as to why this action should not be dismissed for her failure
to prosecute her case and comply with the Case Management Order. ECF No. 10. Plaintiff had
until March 31, 2026 to file a response. She was warned that failure to timely comply could result
in the dismissal of this action.
As of the date of this Memorandum and Order, Plaintiff has not responded to the Court’s
Show Cause Order. The Court gave Plaintiff meaningful notice of what was expected, cautioned
her that this case could be dismissed if she failed to comply timely, and gave her additional time
to comply. Therefore, this action will be dismissed without prejudice due to Plaintiff's failure to
comply with the Court’s March 23, 2026 Show Cause Order, the December 17, 2025 Case
Management Order, and her failure to prosecute her case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see also Brown
v. Frey, 806 F.2d 801, 803-04 (8th Cir. 1986) (a district court has the power to dismiss an action
for the plaintiff's failure to comply with any court order).
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. A
separate order of dismissal will be entered herewith.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that an appeal from this dismissal would not be taken in
good faith.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Dated this 6th day of April, 2026.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11319789. Public record. Not legal advice.