From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jackson v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Dec 8, 2011
Civil Action No.: 11-cv-02455-AP (D. Colo. Dec. 8, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No.: 11-cv-02455-AP

12-08-2011

BRENDALEE JACKSON, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

ANN J. ATKINSON Attorney at Law JOHN F. WALSH, United States Attorney District of Colorado WILLIAM PHARO, Assistant United States Attorney United States Attorney's Office District of Colorado DAVID I. BLOWER, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Social Security Administration


JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES

1. APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE PARTIES:

For Plaintiff:

ANN J. ATKINSON

Attorney at Law

For Defendant:

JOHN F. WALSH,

United States Attorney

District of Colorado

WILLIAM PHARO,

Assistant United States Attorney

United States Attorney's Office

District of Colorado

DAVID I. BLOWER,

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

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: September 19, 2011
B. Date Complaint was served on U.S. Attorney's office: September 21, 2011.
C. Date Answer and Administrative Record were filed: November 23, 2011.

4. STATEMENT REGARDING THE ADEQUACY OF THE RECORD:

The Administrative Record appears to be complete.

5. STATEMENT REGARDING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE

The parties do not anticipate submitting additional evidence.

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

There are no unusual claims or defenses in this case.

7. OTHER MATTERS

There are no other matters to bring to the Court's attention.

8. BRIEFING SCHEDULE

A. Plaintiff's Opening Brief Due: January 13, 2012

B. Defendant's Response Brief Due: February 13, 2012

C. Plaintiff's Reply Brief (If Any) Due: February 27, 2012

9. STATEMENTS REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT

A. Plaintiff's statement:

Plaintiff does not request oral argument.

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 by 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 ATTORNEY'S 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:

Ann J. Atkinson, Attorney at Law

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

David I. Blower, Esq.

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney


Summaries of

Jackson v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Dec 8, 2011
Civil Action No.: 11-cv-02455-AP (D. Colo. Dec. 8, 2011)
Case details for

Jackson v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:BRENDALEE JACKSON, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Dec 8, 2011

Citations

Civil Action No.: 11-cv-02455-AP (D. Colo. Dec. 8, 2011)