From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kartstetter v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Sep 28, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-cv-01727-JLK (D. Colo. Sep. 28, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 12-cv-01727-JLK

09-28-2012

ROBERT A. KARTSTETTER, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

Joseph A. Whitcomb JOHN F. WALSH United States Attorney KEVIN TRASKOS Chief, Civil Division United States Attorney's Office District of Colorado Robert L. Van Saghi Special Assistant United States Attorney


JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES

1. APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE PARTIES

For Plaintiff:

Joseph A. Whitcomb

For Defendant:

JOHN F. WALSH

United States Attorney

KEVIN TRASKOS

Chief, Civil Division

United States Attorney's Office

District of Colorado

Robert L. Van Saghi

Special Assistant United States Attorney

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: 7/3/12

B. Date Complaint Was Served on U.S. Attorney's Office: 7/9/12

C. Date Answer and Administrative Record Were Filed: 9/7/12

4. STATEMENT REGARDING THE ADEQUACY OF THE RECORD

To the best of his knowledge, Plaintiff states that the record is complete and accurate. To the best of his knowledge, Defendant states that the record is complete and accurate.

5. STATEMENT REGARDING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE

The parties do not anticipate submitting additional evidence.

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

The parties state that this case does not raise unusual claims or defenses.

7. OTHER MATTERS

The parties state that there are no other matters.

8. PROPOSED BRIEFING SCHEDULE

The parties agreed to the following schedule:

A. Plaintiffs Opening Brief Due: 11/06/12

B. Defendant's Response Brief Due: 12/06/12

C. Plaintiffs Reply Brief (If Any) Due: 12/21/12

9. STATEMENTS REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT

A. Plaintiffs Statement: Plaintiff does request oral argument.

B. Defendant's Statement: Defendant does not request oral argument.

10. CONSENT TO EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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.

DATED this 28th day of September 2012

BY THE COURT:

John L. Kane

SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

APPROVED:

For Plaintiff:

____________

Joseph A. Whitcomb

For Defendant:

JOHN F. WALSH

United States Attorney

KEVIN TRASKOS

Chief, Civil Division

United States Attorney's Office

District of Colorado

____________

Robert L. Van Saghi

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney


Summaries of

Kartstetter v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Sep 28, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-cv-01727-JLK (D. Colo. Sep. 28, 2012)
Case details for

Kartstetter v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT A. KARTSTETTER, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Sep 28, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 12-cv-01727-JLK (D. Colo. Sep. 28, 2012)