Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01974-AP
02-14-2012
CHARLES D. DUNHAM, Plaintiff, Pro Se, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
For Plaintiff : Charles D. Dunham Plaintiff, Pro Se For Defendant : M. Thayne Warner Special Assistant United States Attorney Assistant Regional Counsel Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES
1. APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE PARTIES
For Plaintiff:
Charles D. Dunham
Plaintiff, Pro Se
For Defendant:
M. Thayne Warner
Special Assistant United States Attorney
Assistant Regional Counsel
Office of the General Counsel
Social Security Administration
2. STATEMENT OF LEGAL BASIS FOR SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
This is an appeal of a Social Security benefits application. The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
3. DATES OF FILING OF RELEVANT PLEADINGS
A. Date Complaint Was Filed: August 1, 2011
B. Date Complaint was Served on U.S. Attorney's Office: November 26, 2011
C. Date Answer and Administrative Record Were Filed: January 24, 2012
4. STATEMENT REGARDING THE ADEQUACY OF THE RECORD
The parties, to the best of their knowledge, state that the administrative record is complete and accurate.
5. STATEMENT REGARDING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE
Plaintiff may intend to submit additional evidence.
Defendant does not intend to submit additional evidence.
6. STATEMENT REGARDING WHETHER THIS CASE RAISES UNUSUAL CLAIMS OR DEFENSES
The parties, to the best of their knowledge, do not believe this case raises any unusual claims or defenses.
7. OTHER MATTERS
The parties have no other matters to bring to the attention of the Court.
8. BRIEFING SCHEDULE
A. Plaintiff's Opening Brief: March 24, 2012
B. Response Brief due: April 23, 2012
C. Reply Brief due: May 8, 2012
9. STATEMENTS REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT
A. Plaintiff's Statement: The Plaintiff does not request oral argument.
B. Defendant's Statement: The Defendant does not request oral argument.
10. CONSENT TO EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE
A. (X) All parties have consented to the exercise of jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate Judge.
B. () All parties have not consented to the exercise of jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate Judge.
11. OTHER MATTERS
THE PARTIES FILING MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME OR CONTINUANCES MUST COMPLY WITH D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1(C) BY SUBMITTING PROOF THAT A COPY OF THE MOTION HAS BEEN SERVED UPON THE MOVING ATTORNEY'S CLIENT, ALL ATTORNEYS OF RECORD, AND ALL PRO SE PARTIES.
12. AMENDMENTS TO JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN
The parties agree that the Joint Case Management Plan may be altered or amended only upon a showing of good cause.
John L. Kane
U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
BY THE COURT:
APPROVED:
______________
Attorney for Defendant contacted pro se Plaintiff by telephone on February 13, 2012, and secured his agreement on each JCMP term. Pro se Plaintiff was asked, and did not object to Attorney for Defendant typing his name in the signature field of this document to represent his agreement on the terms of the JCMP.
12801 Lafayette St. A102
Thornton, CO 80241
(480)313-6145
Plaintiff, Pro Se
JOHN F. WALSH
United States Attorney
WILLIAM PHARO
Chief, Civil Division
United States Attorney's Office
District of Colorado
william.pharo@usdoj.gov
______________
M. Thayne Warner
Special Assistant United States Attorney
1001 17th Street
Denver, CO 80202
(303) 844-7237
(303) 844-0770 (fax)
thayne.warner@ssa.gov
Attorneys for Defendant