Angevine v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 28

ORDER Granting Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis on Appeal 24 , signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 3/22/11. Attorney Lawrence David Rohlfing terminated. (Verduzco, M)

Download PDF
(SS)Angevine v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PAUL W. ANGEVINE, 11 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 15 16 Defendant. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1:09-cv-01496 GSA ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL (Document 24) MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, On March 17, 2011, Plaintiff Paul W. Angevine filed a timely1 notice of appeal following judgment entered for Defendant Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security, on December 17, 2010. (See Doc. 20.) That same date, Plaintiff filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis to avoid having to pay the required filing fee in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. (Doc. 24.) Because Plaintiff was previously granted in forma pauperis status (Doc. 4) and because his latest filing indicates he should be permitted to proceed without prepayment of fees, the motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff was previously granted an extension of time within which to file the notice of appeal. (Doc. 23.) 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff is advised that his appeal has been processed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for further handling. Finally, the Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate Plaintiff's former attorney, Lawrence D. Rohlfing, from receiving further notice from the CM/ECF system, as it is clear from the record that Mr. Rohlfing is not representing Plaintiff for purposes of the appeal. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 6i0kij March 22, 2011 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

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?