US District Court for the Northern District of California Social Security Cases
Cases 11 - 20 of 2,060
Sadhu v. Commissioner of Social Secuity
as 3:2024cv02115
Plaintiff:
Patti R Sadhu
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Secuity
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 402 Social Security Benefits
King v. O'Malley
as 5:2024cv02047
Plaintiff:
Troy Demond King
Defendant:
Commissioner of SSA Martin O'Malley
Interested Party:
SSA (INTERESTED PARTY / NEF)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Ray Williams v. O'Malley
as 4:2024cv02014
Plaintiff:
Ray Williams
Defendant:
Commissioner of SSA Martin O'Malley and SSA (INTERESTED PARTY / NEF)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
v. Williams et al
as 5:2024cv01958
Defendant:
Agnes Williams and Commissioner of SSA Martin O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Kean v. O'Malley
as 4:2024cv01832
Plaintiff:
Michael Kean
Defendant:
Martin J. O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Sumisaki v. O'Malley
as 5:2024cv01683
Plaintiff:
Grace Sumisaki
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security, Martin O'Malley and SSA (INTERESTED PARTY / NEF)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1383 Review of HHS Decision
Goldhawk v. O'Malley
as 5:2024cv01606
Plaintiff:
Gary Goldhawk
Defendant:
Martin O'Malley
Interested Party:
SSA (INTERESTED PARTY / NEF)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
v. O'Malley
as 4:2024cv01588
Defendant:
Commissioner of SSA Martin O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Tugman v. O'Malley
as 4:2024cv01597
Plaintiff:
Tasha Tugman
Defendant:
Commissioner of SSA Martin O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Hickman v. Preston et al
as 3:2024cv01374
Plaintiff:
Jabar Hickman
Defendant:
Kathryn Preston, Wanda C. E. Beanmon and SSA (INTERESTED PARTY / NEF)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
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.
