Fitzpatrick, Laurence v. Colvin, Carolyn W.

Filing 26

Transmission of Notice of Appeal, Appeal Information Sheet, Docketing Statement, Judgment and Docket Sheet to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals re: 24 Notice of Appeal by Plaintiff Laurence Fitzpatrick. (Attachments: # 1 Appeal Information Sheet, # 2 Docketing Statement, # 3 Order #22, # 4 Judgment #23, # 5 Docket Sheet) (arw)

Download PDF
CASE NO. 12-______ UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT LAURENCE FITZPATRICK, Plaintiff-Appellant vs. No. 13-CV-27-bbc CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ActingCommissioner of Social Security, Hon. Barbara B. Crabb United State District Judge Defendant-Appellee Appeal from a Judgment from UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN DOCKETING STATEMENT Dana W. Duncan Attorney for the Plaintiff-Appellant Duncan Disability Law, S.C. State Bar I.D. No. 01008917 3930 8th Street South, Suite 201 Wisconsin Rapids, WI 54494 (715) 423-4000 Plaintiff-Appellant, Laurence Fitzpatrick, by his attorney, Dana W. Duncan, Duncan Disability Law, S.C., submits this docketing statement alleging the following: 1. The District Court’s jurisdiction is contained in an appeal of an adverse decision of the Commissioner of Social Security under §216(i) and 223 of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §416(i) and 423(d). 2. The judgment to be reviewed is an order and judgment by the Honorable, Barbara A. Crabb, District Judge, dated December 31, 2013 and entered on the same date, affirming the decision of the Defendant-Appellant, Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, denying the plaintiff-appellant’s application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits under 42 U.S.C. §§216(i) and 223. Dkt. 18, 19. 3. This docketing statement is submitted pursuant to Circuit Rule 3(c) and Circuit Rule 28(a). 4. A Notice of Appeal was filed on or about the 21st day of January, 2013. 5. The Notice of Appeal from the order of the Honorable Barbara B. Crabb, is an appeal from a final judgment adjudicating all of the claims with respect to all parties. 6. As procedural history: A. On April 4, 2011, the claimant filed a Title II application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits, alleging disability beginning April 1, 2011. The claim was denied initially on June 2, 2011, and upon reconsideration on October 6, 2011. Thereafter, the claimant filed a written request for hearing on November 4, 2011. B. The ALJ issued a decision on September 28, 2012 denying Title II benefits. C. The ALJ found that Fitzpatrick met the insured status requirements of the Social Security Act through 2 December 31, 2015, had not engaged in substantial gainful activity since April 1, 2011, the alleged onset date and had as severe impairments: headaches, sleep apnea, and right upper extremity impingement. D. The ALJ found that Fitzpatrick did not have an impairment or combination of impairments that met or medically equaled the severity of one of the listed impairments hi 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. E. He found that Fitzpatrick was capable of performing past relevant work as a warehouse manager, client services representative, and claims representative. F. Following a timely request for Review of Administrative Decision, the Appeals Council denied review on January 2, 2013, making the ALJ’s decision the final decision of the Commissioner. D. Following the submission of briefs, the Honorable Barbara B. Crabb, United States District Judge, issued an Opinion and Order on December 31, 2013 and docketed on said date which recommended that the Commissioner’s final decision in this matter be affirmed. A judgment was docketed on December 31, 2013 affirming the Commissioner’s Decision. Dated this 21st day of January, 2014. Respectfully submitted, Duncan Disability Law, S.C. Attorneys for the Plaintiff-Appellant /s/ Dana W. Duncan Dana W. Duncan State Bar I.D. No. 01008917 3930 8th Street South, Suite 201 Wisconsin Rapids, WI 54494 (715) 423-4000 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?