From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gonzales v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Dec 13, 2011
Civil Action No. 11-cv-2344-AP (D. Colo. Dec. 13, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11-cv-2344-AP

12-13-2011

IRENE GONZALES, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant,

For Plaintiff : BRANDON M. SELINSKY For Defendant : JOHN F. WALSH United States Attorney WILLIAM G. PHARO Assistant United States Attorney JESSICA MILANO Special Assistant United States Attorney Assistant Regional Counsel Social Security Administration


JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES

1. APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE PARTIES

For Plaintiff:

BRANDON M. SELINSKY

For Defendant:

JOHN F. WALSH

United States Attorney

WILLIAM G. PHARO

Assistant United States Attorney

_______________

JESSICA MILANO

Special Assistant United States

Attorney

Assistant Regional Counsel

Social Security Administration

2. STATEMENT OF LEGAL BASIS FOR SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

The Court has jurisdiction based on 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: 09/06/2011
B. Date Complaint Was Served on U.S. Attorney's Office: 09/15/2011
C. Date Answer and Administrative Record Were Filed: 11/14/2011

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

None anticipated.

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

This case does not involve unusually complicated claims.

7. OTHER MATTERS

None.

8. BRIEFING SCHEDULE

A. Plaintiff's Opening Brief Due: 01/11/12
B. Defendant's Responsive Brief Due: 02/10/2012
C. Plaintiff's Reply Brief (If Any) Due: 02/25/2012

9. STATEMENTS REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT

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

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. (×) 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

APPROVED:

_______________

BRANDON M. SELINSKY

JOHN F. WALSH

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

WILLIAM G. PHARO

Assistant United States Attorney

_______________

JESSICA MILANO

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

Assistant Regional Counsel

Office of the General Counsel

Social Security Administration


Summaries of

Gonzales v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Dec 13, 2011
Civil Action No. 11-cv-2344-AP (D. Colo. Dec. 13, 2011)
Case details for

Gonzales v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:IRENE GONZALES, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Dec 13, 2011

Citations

Civil Action No. 11-cv-2344-AP (D. Colo. Dec. 13, 2011)