Haddock v. Astrue

Filing 10

Joint Case Management Plan for Social Security Cases (ORDER) SS Plaintiffs Brief due by 1/22/2010. SS Defendants Brief due by 2/22/2010. SS Plaintiffs Reply Brief due by 3/9/2010, by Judge John L. Kane on 11/23/09. (gmssl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 09-cv-01922-AP ALBERTA L. HADDOCK, 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 Defendant: David M. Gaouette United States Attorney Kevin T. Traskos Deputy Civil Chief United States Attorney's Office District of Colorado Stephanie Lynn F. Kiley Special Assistant United States Attorney Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 1961 Stout Street, 1001A Denver, Colorado 80294 [phone] [e-mail]

For Plaintiff: Michael W. Seckar, Esq. 402 W. 12th Street Pueblo, Colorado 81003 719-543-8636 [e-mail]

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. Date Complaint was filed: Date Complaint was served on U.S. Attorney's Office: Date Answer and Administrative Record were filed: August 12, 2009 September 11, 2009 November 10, 2009

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 cases 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. B. C. Plaintiff's opening brief due Defendant's response brief due Plaintiff's reply brief (if any) due January 22, 2010 February 22, 2010 March 9, 2010

9.

STATEMENTS REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT A. B. Plaintiff does not request oral argument. Defendant does not request oral argument. 2

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. DATED this 23rd day of November, 2009. BY THE COURT: s/John L. Kane U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

3

APPROVED: s/Michael W. Seckar Michael W. Seckar, Esq. 402 W. 12th Street Pueblo, Colorado 81003 719-543-8636 DAVID M. GAOUETTE United States Attorney KEVIN T. TRASKOS Deputy Civil Chief United States Attorney's Office District of Colorado s/Stephanie Lynn F. Kiley Stephanie Lynn F. Kiley Special Assistant United States Attorney Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 1961 Stout Street, 1001A Denver, Colorado 80294 [phone] [e-mail]

4