Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Landreville v. Colvin

United States District Court, D. Colorado

February 3, 2014

Ladean S. Landreville, Plaintiff,
v.
Carolyn W. Colvin, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

James R. Koncilja, Koncilja & Koncilja, P.C., Pueblo, CO, for Plaintiff.

John F. Walsh, United States Attorney, Allan D. Berger, Special Assistant United States Attorney Assistant Regional Counsel Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration, Denver, CO, for Defendant.

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CASES

JOHN L. KANE, District Judge.

1. APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE PARTIES

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. Date Complaint Was Filed: July, 8, 2013
B. Date Complaint Was Served on U.S. Attorney's Office: November 13, 2013
C. Date Answer and Administrative Record Were Filed: January 10, 2014

4. STATEMENT REGARDING THE ADEQUACY OF THE RECORD

To the best of their knowledge, both parties state that the record is complete and adequate.

5. STATEMENT REGARDING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE

Neither party intends to submit additional evidence.

6. STATEMENT REGARDING WHETHER THIS CASE RAISES UNUSUAL CLAIMS OR DEFENSES

Both parties state that this case does not involve unusually complicated or out of the ordinary claims.

7. OTHER MATTERS

Both parties raise no other matters before the Court

8. BRIEFING SCHEDULE

A. Plaintiff's Opening Brief Due: March 10, 2014
B. Defendant's Response Brief Due: April 7, 2014
C. Plaintiff's Reply Brief (If Any) Due: April 21, 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.

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.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.