From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ponikvar v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Nov 8, 2012
Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-2306-AP (D. Colo. Nov. 8, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-2306-AP

11-08-2012

JACKIE PONIKVAR, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

For Plaintiff : Joseph A. Whitcomb, Esq. Rocky Mountain Disability Law Group For Defendant: JOHN F. WALSH United States Attorney District of Colorado J. BENEDICT GARCIA Assistant United States Attorney DAVID BLOWER Special Assistant United States Attorney Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration


JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES

1. APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE PARTIES

For Plaintiff:
Joseph A. Whitcomb, Esq.
Rocky Mountain Disability Law Group
For Defendant:
JOHN F. WALSH
United States Attorney
District of Colorado
J. BENEDICT GARCIA
Assistant United States Attorney
DAVID BLOWER
Special Assistant United States Attorney
Office of the General 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: August 29, 2012

B. Date Complaint Was Served on U.S. Attorney's Office: August 30, 2012

C. Date Answer and Administrative Record Were Filed: October 29, 2012

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

The parties do not anticipate submitting additional evidence.

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

The parties, to the best of their knowledge, do not believe this case raises unusual claims or defenses.

7. OTHER MATTERS

There are no other matters anticipated.

8. BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Counsel for both parties agree to the following proposed briefing schedule:

A. Plaintiff's Opening Brief Due: December 31, 2012

B. Defendant's Response Brief Due: January 30, 2013

C. Plaintiff's Reply Brief (If Any) Due: February 14, 2013

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

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: ____________
Joseph A. Whitcomb, Esq.
Rocky Mountain Disability Law Group
____________
JOHN F. WALSH
United States Attorney
District of Colorado
J. BENEDICT GARCIA
Assistant United States Attorney
By: ____________
DAVID BLOWER
Special Assistant United States Attorney
Office of the General Counsel
Social Security Administration


Summaries of

Ponikvar v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Nov 8, 2012
Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-2306-AP (D. Colo. Nov. 8, 2012)
Case details for

Ponikvar v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:JACKIE PONIKVAR, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Nov 8, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-2306-AP (D. Colo. Nov. 8, 2012)