Marquez v. Colvin
ORDER for Preparation of Joint Case Management Plan for Social Security Cases, by Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 09/15/2015. (cthom, ) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/15/2015: # 1 Joint Case Management Plan for Social Security Cases) (cthom, ).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Action No. 15-cv-02001-REB
KENNETH JAMES MARQUEZ,
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
ORDER FOR PREPARATION OF JOINT CASE
MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES
NOTICE: This Order contains provisions that alter substantively the way in
which Social Security Appeals are managed and marshaled. Please read this
Order carefully and thoroughly to ensure compliance with the orders of the court.
The matter before me is plaintiff’s Complaint [#1], filed September 14, 2015. In
lieu of a scheduling conference, the parties must confer to prepare a proposed Joint
Case Management Plan for Social Security Cases (“JCMP”) as provided by
D.C.COLO.LAPR 16.1(a). This Order provides instructions as to the preparation of the
1. Form. A copy of the required form of JCMP is attached to this Order and
available on the district court’s website at
2. Contents of the proposed JCMP.
a. Paragraph 3.B. The proposed form of JCMP shall state the date on
which the U.S. Attorney’s Office was served (or waived or accepted
service). The court anticipates that the government will waive or
accept service no later than fourteen (14) days, or sooner if
practicable, from the filing of the Complaint.
b. Paragraph 3.C. The Answer shall consist of a certified copy of the
transcript of the administrative record plus any affirmative defense, which if
then not filed, shall be waived. The Answer shall be filed no later than
sixty (60) days, or sooner if practicable, after service (or waiver or
acceptance of service).
c. Paragraph 8.
(1) Plaintiff’s opening brief shall be due no later than thirty (30)
days from the filing of the proposed JCMP. The deadlines for the
submission of the response and any reply shall be as provided by
(2) Any motion for extension of these deadlines requires a showing
of good cause, which must be established with particularity. The
following DO NOT constitute good cause: agreement of counsel;
inconvenience to counsel or the parties; press of business or a
“heavy workload;” conflicts in scheduling (a fortiori, when more than
one attorney has entered an appearance for a party); or practice as
a solo practitioner.
(3) Opening and response briefs shall be limited to no more than
twenty (20) pages. Reply briefs shall be limited to no more than ten
(10) pages. These page limitations shall apply to the legal
argument portion of the brief or response, but shall not include the
cover page, jurisdictional statement, table of contents, or statement
of facts and procedural history.
d. The proposed JCMP need not address paragraphs 4, 5, 6, or 9 of the
form. The court anticipates that, if the matters addressed by these
paragraphs are relevant, appropriate motions will be filed to bring such
matters to the court’s attention.
a. The proposed JCMP shall be filed no later than ten (10) days after the
Answer is filed.
b. To file the proposed JCMP, the parties shall use the event entitled
“Proposed Joint Case Management Plan,” listed under “Administrative
Appeal Documents,” in the court’s case management and electronic case
filing system (CM/ECF).
c. The proposed JCMP shall include the signatures of counsel and any pro
se party and provide for the approval of the court, as specified in the
required form of order specified in paragraph 1 above.
d. Concurrent with the filing of the proposed JCMP on CM/ECF, the
parties shall provide a Microsoft Word editable version of the proposed
JCMP to chambers at firstname.lastname@example.org.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall file a proposed JCMP
consistent with these instructions.
Dated September 15, 2015, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:
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?