Taylor v. Colvin
Filing
11
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES (ORDER). SS Plaintiffs Brief due by 4/25/2014. SS Defendants Brief due by 5/27/2014. SS Plaintiffs Reply Brief due by 6/11/2014. By Judge John L. Kane on 2/20/14. (mfiel, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 13-cv-03152-AP
Ronald C. Taylor,
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:
Bruce C. Bernstein
1828 Clarkson Street, #100
Denver, Colorado 80218
303-830-2300
bcb@bcblaw.biz
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
(303) 844-0815
stephanie.kiley@ssa.gov
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: December 13, 2013
C.
4.
Date Complaint Was Filed: November 20, 2013
Date Answer and Administrative Record Were Filed: February 11, 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 the case raises 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; however, the ALJ’s
decision references and the certified administrative record include pleadings filed in a Tenth
Circuit Court of Appeals case, 11-1499. Plaintiff in this matter appealed District Court Judge
Brimmer’s decision affirming the final decision of the Commissioner, case number 10-cv-0891PAB. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Judge Brimmer’s decision.
8. BRIEFING SCHEDULE
A.
Plaintiff's Opening Brief Due: April 25, 2014
B.
Defendant’s Response Brief Due: May 27, 2014
C.
Plaintiff’s Reply Brief (If Any) Due: June 11, 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.
( ) All parties have consented to the exercise of jurisdiction of a
United States Magistrate Judge.
B.
(X) 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 20th day of February, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
s/John L. Kane
U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
APPROVED:
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
/s/ Bruce C. Bernstein
Bruce C. Bernstein
1828 Clarkson Street, #100
Denver, Colorado 80218
303-830-2300
bcb@bcblaw.biz
/s/ Stephanie Lynn F. Kiley
By: Stephanie Lynn F. Kiley
Special Assistant U.S. Attorney
Office of the General Counsel
Social Security Administration
1961 Stout Street, Suite 4169
Denver, Colorado 80294-4003
stephanie.kiley@ssa.gov
Attorney for Plaintiff
Attorneys for Defendant.
-3-
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?