From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Montoya v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Jan 16, 2013
Civil Action No. 12-cv-2848-AP (D. Colo. Jan. 16, 2013)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 12-cv-2848-AP

01-16-2013

TERI MONTOYA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

For Plaintiff : William T. Dawson For Defendant : John F. Walsh United States Attorney J. Benedict Garcia Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert L. Van Saghi Special Assistant U.S. Attorney


JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES

1. APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE PARTIES

For Plaintiff:

William T. Dawson

For Defendant:

John F. Walsh

United States Attorney

J. Benedict Garcia

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Robert L. Van Saghi

Special Assistant U.S. 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: 10/26/2012

B. Date Complaint Was Served on U.S. Attorney's Office: 10/29/2012

C. Date Answer and Administrative Record Were Filed: 12/19/2012 4. STATEMENT REGARDING THE ADEQUACY OF THE RECORD Parties state: To the best of their knowledge, the record is complete.

5. STATEMENT REGARDING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE

Parties states: None anticipated.

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

Parties states: No unusual claims or defenses.

7. OTHER MATTERS

Parties states: There are no other matters that need to be brought before the court's attention. This case is NOT on appeal from a decision issued on remand from this court.

8. PROPOSED BRIEFING SCHEDULE

A. Plaintiff's Opening Brief Due: 02/17/2013

B. Defendant's Response Brief (If Any) Due: 03/19/2013

C. Plaintiff's Reply Brief (If Any) Due: 04/03/2013

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

Indicate below the parties' consent choice.

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. AMENDMENTS TO JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN

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. 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: ________
William T. Dawson
2546 15th St.
Denver, CO 80211
Telephone: (303) 455-0400
Williamtdawson@gmail.com
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY ________
Robert L. Van Saghi
Special Assistant U.S. Attorney
1001 17th St.
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: (303) 844-1948
Robert.vansaghi@ssa.gov


Summaries of

Montoya v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Jan 16, 2013
Civil Action No. 12-cv-2848-AP (D. Colo. Jan. 16, 2013)
Case details for

Montoya v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:TERI MONTOYA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Jan 16, 2013

Citations

Civil Action No. 12-cv-2848-AP (D. Colo. Jan. 16, 2013)