Chamblin v. Astrue
Joint Case Management Plan for Social Secuirty Cases (ORDER) SS Plaintiffs Brief due by 12/16/2009. SS Defendants Brief due by 1/15/2010. SS Plaintiffs Reply Brief due by 2/5/2010. By Judge John L. Kane on 11/19/2009. (sah, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 09-cv-01955-AP MILDRED CHAMBLIN, 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: BRUCE C. BERNSTEIN 1828 Clarkson Street #100 Denver, CO 80218 (303) 830-3200 firstname.lastname@example.org For Defendant: DAVID M. GAOUETTE United States Attorney KEVIN TRASKOS Deputy Chief, Civil Division United States Attorney's Office District of Colorado THOMAS H. KRAUS Special Assistant United States Attorney 1961 Stout Street, Suite 1001A Denver, Colorado 80294 (303) 844-0017 email@example.com
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: 8/19/09 Date Complaint Was Served on U.S. Attorney's Office: 09/02/09 Date Answer and Administrative Record Were Filed: 11/02/09
4. STATEMENT REGARDING THE ADEQUACY OF THE RECORD The partes, to the best of their knowledge, state that the administrative record is complete and accurate. 5. STATEMENT REGARDING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE A. Plaintiff's Statement: Plaintiff's attorney did not represent Claimant at the Administrative hearing and thus needs to review the extensive record before having a firm position as to whether additional evidence might be available or helpful. Defendant's Statement: None anticipated.
6. STATEMENT REGARDING WHETHER THIS CASE RAISES UNUSUAL CLAIMS OR DEFENSES A. Plaintiff's Statement: Plaintiff's attorney did not represent Claimant at the Administrative hearing. However, from brief review of the record, this case does not appear to raise anything out of the ordinary. Defendant's Statement: This case does not involve unusually complicated or out-of-theordinary claims.
7. OTHER MATTERS None.
8. BRIEFING SCHEDULE A. B. C. Plaintiff's Opening Brief Due: 12/16/09 Defendant's Response Brief Due: 1/15/10 Plaintiff's Reply Brief (If Any) Due: 2/5/10
9. STATEMENTS REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT A. Plaintiff's Statement: Plaintiff's attorney did not represent Claimant at the Administrative hearing and thus is unable to make a determination as to whether oral argument will be helpful. This matter will be addressed in Plaintiff's Opening Brief. Defendant's Statement: Oral Argument not requested.
10. CONSENT TO EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE A. B. ( ) All parties have consented to the exercise of jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate Judge. ( X ) 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.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: November 19, 2009 BY THE COURT: s/John L. Kane U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE -3-
APPROVED: s/ Bruce C. Bernstein BRUCE C. BERNSTEIN 1828 Clarkson Street #100 Denver, CO 80218 (303) 830-3200 firstname.lastname@example.org Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellant UNITED STATES ATTORNEY DAVID M. GAOUETTE United States Attorney KEVIN TRASKOS Deputy Chief, Civil Division United States Attorney's Office District of Colorado s/ Thomas H. Kraus By: THOMAS H. KRAUS Special Assistant U.S. Attorney 1961 Stout St., Suite 1001A Denver, Colorado 80294 Telephone: (303) 844-0017 email@example.com Attorneys for Defendant
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?