From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Handy v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA STATESVILLE DIVISION
Dec 30, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:11-CV-013-RLV-DCK (W.D.N.C. Dec. 30, 2011)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:11-CV-013-RLV-DCK

12-30-2011

TAMMY HANDY, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.


ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on Plaintiff's "Motion For Attorney Fees" (Document No. 25) filed December 29, 2011. This motion has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and immediate review is appropriate. Having carefully considered the motion, the record, and applicable authority, the undersigned will deny the motion, without prejudice to re-file.

Plaintiff's motion does not appear to indicate that the requirement of consultation has been met pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 (B).

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiff's "Motion For Attorney Fees" (Document No. 25) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

___________

David C. Keesler

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Handy v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA STATESVILLE DIVISION
Dec 30, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:11-CV-013-RLV-DCK (W.D.N.C. Dec. 30, 2011)
Case details for

Handy v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:TAMMY HANDY, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA STATESVILLE DIVISION

Date published: Dec 30, 2011

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:11-CV-013-RLV-DCK (W.D.N.C. Dec. 30, 2011)