Newlin v. Saul
Filing
30
ORDER. On March 13, 2020, by stipulation of the parties, this matter was remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further administrative review. (ECF No. 23 (the "Stipulation")). In their Stipulation, the parties indicated th eir "consent to final Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction in this case." (Id.). On May 19, 2021, Plaintiff advised the Court that the remand "led to an outright award of benefits," and filed a motion for attorneys fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). (ECF No. 27 at 1). The parties Stipulation was not sufficient to effect the reassignment of this case to a Magistrate Judge. To do so, the parties must file a fully executed Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form, a copy of which is attached to this order. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah L Cave on 6/7/21) (yv)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
JOSEPH NATHANIEL NEWLIN,
Plaintiff,
-v-
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 19 Civ. 6248 (KPF) (SLC)
ORDER
ANDREW M. SAUL,
Defendant.
SARAH L. CAVE, United States Magistrate Judge:
On March 13, 2020, by stipulation of the parties, this matter was remanded to the
Commissioner of Social Security for further administrative review.
(ECF No. 23 (the
“Stipulation”)). In their Stipulation, the parties indicated their “consent to final Magistrate Judge
Jurisdiction in this case.” (Id.). On May 19, 2021, Plaintiff advised the Court that the remand “led
to an outright award of benefits,” and filed a motion for attorneys fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
406(b). (ECF No. 27 at 1).
The parties’ Stipulation was not sufficient to effect the reassignment of this case to a
Magistrate Judge. To do so, the parties must file a fully executed Notice, Consent, and Reference
of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form, a copy of which is attached to this order.
Dated:
New York, New York
June 7, 2021
SO ORDERED.
_________________________
SARAH L. CAVE
United States Magistrate Judge
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?