Beard v. Colvin

Filing 13

Joint Case Management Plan for Social Security Cases. SS Plaintiffs Brief due by 8/4/2014. SS Defendants Brief due by 9/3/2014. SS Plaintiffs Reply Brief due by 9/22/2014 by Judge John L. Kane on 07/01/14. (jhawk, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-00741-AP MARY D. BEARD, 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: Michael W. Seckar Seckar Law Offices For Defendant: John F. Walsh, U.S. Attorney J. Benedict Garcia, Assistant U.S. Attorney M. Thayne Warner, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney 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. Date Complaint Was Served on U.S. Attorney's Office: 4/16/2014 C. 4. Date Complaint Was Filed: 3/12/2014 Date Answer and Administrative Record Were Filed: 6/11/2014 STATEMENT REGARDING THE ADEQUACY OF THE RECORD -1- The administrative record has been filed. The parties believe that the record is complete. 5. STATEMENT REGARDING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE The parties do not anticipate filing any additional evidence. 6. STATEMENT REGARDING WHETHER THIS CASE RAISES UNUSUAL CLAIMS OR DEFENSES The parties do not believe that this case raises any unusual claims. 7. OTHER MATTERS This case is not on remand from a judicial decision. 8. BRIEFING SCHEDULE A. Monday, August 4, 2014 B. Defendant’s Response Brief Due: Wednesday, September 3, 2014 C. 9. Plaintiff's Opening Brief Due: Plaintiff’s Reply Brief (If Any) Due: Monday, September 22, 2014 STATEMENTS REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT A. Plaintiff does not request oral argument. B. 10. Plaintiff's Statement: Defendant's Statement: Defendant does not request oral argument. CONSENT TO EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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. ) -2- 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 1st day of July, 2014. BY THE COURT: s/John L. Kane U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE APPROVED: John F. Walsh United States Attorney J. Benedict Garcia Assistant U.S. Attorney U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Colorado /s/ Michael W. Seckar Michael W. Seckar Seckar Law Offices 402 W. 12th Street Pueblo, CO 81003 (719) 543-8636 Attorneys for Plaintiff /s/ M. Thayne Warner By: M. Thayne Warner Special Assistant U.S. Attorney 1961 Stout Street, Suite 4169 Denver, CO 80249-4003 (303) 844-7237 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?