Middleton v. Social Security Administration Commissioner
ORDER, as set forth. Signed by Honorable Erin L. Setser on March 12, 2013. (lw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
MARGO A. MIDDLETON
CIVIL NO. 12-3066
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner
Social Security Administration
On June 5, 2012, Plaintiff filed a Writ of Mandamus requesting that the Court intervene
and direct Defendant to comply with the basic notice requirement required by the procedural
process in disability claims. (Doc. 1).
On September 24, 2012, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s claim on the
ground that it is barred by the time limitation specified in 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Doc. 6).
On October 9, 2012, Plaintiff filed a Response stating that Defendant failed to address
that Plaintiff had filed a Writ of Mandamus. (Doc. 8).
On October 10, 2012, Defendant filed a Reply arguing that the Commissioner complied
with the regulatory requirements set forth for disability claims. (Doc. 9).
Upon review of the Motion and supporting documents, the Court has a question regarding
the Notice of denial sent by the Appeals Council to Plaintiff on December 1, 2011. In the
Declaration of Donald V. Ortiz (Declaration), Mr. Ortiz indicates that the Notice was sent to
Plaintiff at “555 E. 4th St Apt 11, Mountain Home, AR 72653. (Doc. 6, Oritz Decl. Exh. 1, p.3).
However, the Notice dated December 1, 2011, attached to this Declaration indicates that the
Notice was sent to Plaintiff at 105 S. Cardinal Street No. 15, Mountain Home, AR 72653. (Doc.
6, Oritz Decl. Exh. 1, p.25). Furthermore, Defendant states that this Notice was faxed to
Plaintiff’s counsel. (Doc. 9, p. 3).
The Court hereby directs Defendant to discuss the above address discrepancy and the
impact that this would have on the arguments made in the writ of mandamus on or before March
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 12th day of March 2013.
/s/ Erin L. Setser
HON. ERIN L. SETSER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?