Lara v. Astrue

Filing 10

Joint Case Management Plan for Social Security Cases (ORDER) SS Plaintiffs Brief due by 11/25/2009. SS Defendants Brief due by 12/28/2009. SS Plaintiffs Reply Brief due by 1/11/2010, by Judge John L. Kane on 10/8/09. (gmssl, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No.: JOSEPH A. LARA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES 09-cv-01539-AP 1. APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE PARTIES For Plaintiff: Frederick W. Newall #10269, Esq. 730 N. Weber, #101 Colorado Springs, CO 80903 Telephone (719) 633-5211 newallfrederick@qwestoffice.net For Defendant: DAVID M. GAOUETTE Acting United States Attorney KEVIN TRASKOS Assistant U.S. Attorney Deputy Chief, Civil Division United States Attorney's Office District of Colorado kevin.traskos@usdoj.gov THOMAS H. KRAUS Special Assistant U. S. Attorney Assistant Regional Counsel Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 1961 Stout Street, Suite 1001A Denver, CO 80294 Telephone: (303) 844-0017 Tom.kraus@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. B. C. 4. Date Complaint Was Filed: June 30, 2009 July 22, 2009 September 18, 2009 Date Complaint Was Served on U.S. Attorney's Office: Date Answer and Administrative Record Were Filed: STATEMENT REGARDING THE ADEQUACY OF THE RECORD Plaintiff states: Although counsel has undertaken a timely review of the record, the accuracy and completeness of the Administrative Record cannot be verified until after the Plaintiff's Opening brief is filed. Defendant states: Administrative Record. 5. There are no issues with the accuracy or completeness of the STATEMENT REGARDING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE Plaintiff states: See Plaintiff's statement in paragraph 4, above. Defendant states: None anticipated. 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 None. 2 8. BRIEFING SCHEDULE Because of workload and scheduling conflicts, the parties respectfully request the following briefing schedule: A. B. C. 9. Plaintiffs Opening Brief Due: November 25, 2009 December 28, 2009 January 11, 2010 Defendant's Response Brief Due: Plaintiffs Reply Brief (If Any) Due: STATEMENTS REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT A. B. Plaintiffs Statement: Plaintiff does not request oral argument. Defendant's Statement: Defendant does not request oral argument 10. CONSENT TO EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE All parties have 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. DATED this 8th day of October , 2009 BY THE COURT: s/John L. Kane 3 U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE APPROVED: s/Frederick W. Newall FREDERICK W. NEWALL 730 N. Weber, #101 Colorado Springs, CO 80903 (719) 633-5211 newallfrederick@qwestoffice.net Attorney for Plaintiff DAVID M. GAOUETTE Acting United States Attorney KEVIN TRASKOS Assistant U.S. Attorney Deputy Chief, Civil Division United States Attorney's Office District of Colorado Kevin.Traskos@usdoj.gov By: /s/Thomas A. Kraus THOMAS A. KRAUS Special Assistant United States Attorney 1961 Stout Street, Suite 1001A Denver, Colorado 80294 Telephone: (303) 844-0815 Stephanie.kiley@ssa.gov Attorneys for Defendant. 4

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?