From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Seymore v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Sep 20, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-cv-01630-AP (D. Colo. Sep. 20, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 12-cv-01630-AP

09-20-2012

MICHAEL L. SEYMORE, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security Defendant.

For Plaintiff : JOSEPH A. WHITCOMB Rocky Mountain Disability Group For Defendant : JOHN F. WALSH United States Attorney District of Colorado J. BENEDICT GARClA Assistant United States Attorney M. Thayne Warner Social Security Administration-Denver Office of General Counsel


JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES

1. APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE PARTIES

For Plaintiff:

JOSEPH A. WHITCOMB

Rocky Mountain Disability Group

For Defendant:

JOHN F. WALSH

United States Attorney

District of Colorado

J. BENEDICT GARClA

Assistant United States Attorney

M. Thayne Warner

Social Security Administration-Denver

Office of General Counsel

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: June 22, 2012 B. Date Complaint Was Served on U.S. Attorney's Office: June 27, 2012 C. Date Answer and Administrative Record Were Filed: August 27, 2012

4. STATEMENT REGARDING THE ADEQUACY OF THE RECORD

At this time, the Administrative Record appears to be complete and accurate; the parties will fully ascertain the completeness of the record upon the drafting and completion of their respective briefs.

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 do not foresee offering any unusual claims or defenses in this case.

7. OTHER MATTERS

The parties are not aware of any other matters at this time.

8. BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Counsel for both parties agree to the following proposed briefing schedule: A. Plaintiff's Opening Brief Due: October 29, 2012 B. Defendant's Response Brief Due: November 28, 2012 C. Plaintiff's Reply Brief (If Any) Due: December 13, 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 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. 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:

For Plaintiff:

JOSEPH A. WHITCOMB

Rocky Mountain Disability Group

For Defendant:

JOHN F. WALSH

United States Attorney

District of Colorado

J. BENEDICT GARClA

Assistant United States Attorney

M. Thayne Warner

Social Security Administration-Denver

Office of General Counsel


Summaries of

Seymore v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Sep 20, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-cv-01630-AP (D. Colo. Sep. 20, 2012)
Case details for

Seymore v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL L. SEYMORE, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Sep 20, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 12-cv-01630-AP (D. Colo. Sep. 20, 2012)