From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gomez v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Mar 12, 2012
Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-03131-AP (D. Colo. Mar. 12, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-03131-AP

03-12-2012

LEO S. GOMEZ, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

MICHAEL W. SECKAR Attorney for Plaintiff JOHN F. WALSH UNITED STATES ATTORNEY WILLIAM PHARO Assistant United States Attorney THOMAS S. INMAN Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Attorneys for Defendant


JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES

1. APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE PARTIES

For Plaintiff:

MICHAEL W. SECKAR

For Defendant:

JOHN F. WALSH

United States Attorney

WILLIAM PHARO

Assistant United States Attorney

THOMAS S. INMAN

Special Assistant United States Attorney

2. STATEMENT OF LEGAL BASIS FOR SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

The Court has jurisdiction based on sections 205(g) and 1631(c)(3) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g), 1383(c)(3).

3. DATES OF FILING OF RELEVANT PLEADINGS

A. Date Complaint Was Filed: 12/02/2011
B. Date Complaint Was Served on U.S. Attorney's Office: 12/21/2011
C. Date Answer and Administrative Record Were Filed: 02/21/2012

4. STATEMENT REGARDING THE ADEQUACY OF THE RECORD

There are no issues with the accuracy or completeness of the administrative record.

5. STATEMENT REGARDING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE

None anticipated.

6. STATEMENT REGARDING WHETHER THIS CASE RAISES UNUSUAL CLAIMS OR DEFENSES

This case does not involve unusually complicated or out-of-the-ordinary claims.

7. OTHER MATTERS

None.

8. BRIEFING SCHEDULE

A. Plaintiff's Opening Brief Due: 04/23/2012
B. Defendant's Response Brief Due: 05/23/2012
C. Plaintiff's Reply Brief (If Any) Due: 06/07/2012

9. STATEMENTS REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT

A. Plaintiff's Statement: Oral argument is not requested.
B. Defendant's Statement: Oral argument is not requested.

10. CONSENT TO EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE

A. () All parties have consented to the exercise of jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate Judge.
B. (x) 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.

BY THE COURT:

John L. Kane

U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

_____________

MICHAEL W. SECKAR

Attorney for Plaintiff

JOHN F. WALSH

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

WILLIAM PHARO

Assistant United States Attorney

_____________

THOMAS S. INMAN

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

Attorneys for Defendant


Summaries of

Gomez v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Mar 12, 2012
Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-03131-AP (D. Colo. Mar. 12, 2012)
Case details for

Gomez v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:LEO S. GOMEZ, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Mar 12, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-03131-AP (D. Colo. Mar. 12, 2012)