From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Truelove v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Apr 10, 2012
Civil Action No. 11-cv-03114-AP (D. Colo. Apr. 10, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11-cv-03114-AP

04-10-2012

BETTY A. TRUELOVE, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.


JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES

1. APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE PARTIES

For Plaintiff:

Michael Desaulniers, Esq.

402 W. 12th Street

Pueblo, Colorado 81003

719-543-8636

seckarlaw@mindspring.com

For Defendant:

John F. Walsh

United States Attorney

William G. Pharo

Assistant United States Attorney

District of Colorado

Stephanie Lynn F. Kiley

Special Assistant United States Attorney

Office of the General Counsel

Social Security Administration

1001 Seventeenth Street, 6th Floor

Denver, Colorado 80202

(303) 844-0815

stephanie.kiley@ssa.gov

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: November 30, 2011
B. Date Complaint was served on U.S. Attorney's Office: January 26, 2012
C. Date Answer and Administrative Record were filed: March 26, 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

Neither party intends to submit additional evidence.

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

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

7. OTHER MATTERS

The parties have no other matters to bring to the attention of the Court.

8. BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Because of workload and scheduling conflicts, the parties respectfully request briefing to commence later than 40 days after the filing of this Joint Case Management plan, as follows

A. Plaintiff's opening brief due May 16, 2012
B. Defendant's response brief due June 15, 2012
C. Plaintiff's reply brief (if any) due June 30, 2012

9. STATEMENTS REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT

A. Plaintiff does not request oral argument.
B. 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.L.CivR. 7.1(C) BY SUBMITTING PRROF THAT A COPY OF THE MOTION HAS BEEN SERVED UPON 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:

_________________

Michael Desaulniers, Esq.

JOHN F. WALSH

United States Attorney

WILLIAM G. PHARO

Assistant United States Attorney

District of Colorado

_________________

Stephanie Lynn F. Kiley

Special Assistant United States Attorney

Office of the General Counsel

Social Security Administration


Summaries of

Truelove v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Apr 10, 2012
Civil Action No. 11-cv-03114-AP (D. Colo. Apr. 10, 2012)
Case details for

Truelove v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:BETTY A. TRUELOVE, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Apr 10, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 11-cv-03114-AP (D. Colo. Apr. 10, 2012)