Thurston v. Colvin

Filing 13

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES (ORDER). SS Plaintiffs Brief due by 3/18/2014. SS Defendants Brief due by 4/17/2014. SS Plaintiffs Reply Brief due by 5/2/2014. By Judge John L. Kane on 1/30/14. (mfiel, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-02742-AP
Joseph Bernard Thurston, Jr.,
Plaintiff,
v.
Carolyn W. Colvin,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES

1. APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE PARTIES
For Plaintiff:
Karl E. Osterhout, Esq.
Osterhout Disability Law, LLC
521 Cedar Way, Suite 200
Oakmont, PA 15139
412-794-8003
412-794-8050 (facsimile)
[e-mail]
For Defendant:
Stephanie Lynn F. Kiley
Special Assistant United States Attorney
Office of the General Counsel
Social Security Administration
1961 Stout Street, Suite 4169
Denver, Colorado 80294-4003
[phone]
[e-mail]

John F. Walsh
United States Attorney
J.B. García
Assistant United States Attorney
District of Colorado

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).
-1-

3. DATES OF FILING OF RELEVANT PLEADINGS
A.
B.

Date Complaint Was Served on U.S. Attorney's Office: November 18, 2013

C.
4.

Date Complaint Was Filed: October 8, 2013

Date Answer and Administrative Record Were Filed: January 16, 2014

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 CASE RAISES UNUSUAL CLAIMS OR
DEFENSES

The parties, to the best of their knowledge, do not believe this case raises any unusual claims or
defenses.
7.

OTHER MATTERS

The parties have no other matters to bring to the attention of the Court. This case is not on
appeal from a decision issued on remand from this Court.
8.

BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Counsel for both parties conferred and request the following briefing schedule, which is outside of
the standard time frame, due to Defendant’s case load:
A.

Plaintiff's Opening Brief Due: March 18, 2014

B.

Defendant’s Response Brief Due: April 17, 2014

C.

Plaintiff’s Reply Brief (If Any) Due: May 2, 2014

9. STATEMENTS REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT
A.

Plaintiff's Statement: Plaintiff does not request oral argument.

B.

Defendant's Statement: Defendant does not request oral argument.

-2-

10. CONSENT TO EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Indicate below the parties' consent choice.
A.

( X ) All parties have consented to the exercise of jurisdiction of a
United States Magistrate Judge.

B.

( ) All parties have not consented to the exercise of jurisdiction of a
United States Magistrate Judge.

11. AMENDMENTS TO JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN
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.
The parties agree that the Joint Case Management Plan may be altered or amended only
upon a showing of good cause.

DATED this 30th day of January, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
s/John L. Kane

U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

APPROVED:
/s/ Karl E. Osterhout

/s/ Stephanie Lynn F. Kiley

By: Karl E. Osterhout, Esq.
Osterhout Disability Law, LLC
521 Cedar Way, Suite 200
Oakmont, PA 15139
412-794-8003
[e-mail]

By: Stephanie Lynn F. Kiley
Special Assistant U.S. Attorney
1001 17th Street, 6th Floor
Denver, CO 80202
303-844-0815
[e-mail]

-3-