FRAME v. ASTRUE

FRAME v. ASTRUE

Plaintiff:	ALICE FRAME
Defendant:	MICHAEL J ASTRUE
Case Number:	1:2010cv00142
Filed:	July 23, 2010
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of Florida
Office:	Gainesville Office
County:	Alachua
Presiding Judge:	ALLAN KORNBLUM
Presiding Judge:	MAURICE M PAUL
Nature of Suit:	Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
May 23, 2011	Filing 23 ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; ADOPTING 22 Report and Recommendations re 21 Motion to Remand. Signed by SENIOR JUDGE MAURICE M PAUL on 5/23/2011. This Clerk is directed to enter final judgment remanding this case to the C ommissioner under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative proceedings in order to evaluate plaintiffs mental functioning and specifically determine whether her condition meets or equals any listed impairment at Step Three of the sequential evaluation process. Pursuant to Bergen, proceedings on attorney fees under the Social Security Act, 42U.S.C. § 406(b) are stayed until the matter is fully adjudicated upon remand. The Plaintiff shall file a motion to award fees under 406(b) within 30 days after counsel receives notice from the Defendant Commissioner as to Plaintiffs past due benefits. (kdm)
February 8, 2011	Filing 15 ORDER GRANTING 14 MOTION for Extension of Time to File filed by ALICE FRAME. (Memorandum in Opposition due by 4/18/2011., Memorandum in Support due by 2/17/2011.). Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE GARY R JONES on 2/8/2011. (jws)

Date Filed

Document Text

May 23, 2011

Filing 23 ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; ADOPTING 22 Report and Recommendations re 21 Motion to Remand. Signed by SENIOR JUDGE MAURICE M PAUL on 5/23/2011. This Clerk is directed to enter final judgment remanding this case to the C ommissioner under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative proceedings in order to evaluate plaintiffs mental functioning and specifically determine whether her condition meets or equals any listed impairment at Step Three of the sequential evaluation process. Pursuant to Bergen, proceedings on attorney fees under the Social Security Act, 42U.S.C. § 406(b) are stayed until the matter is fully adjudicated upon remand. The Plaintiff shall file a motion to award fees under 406(b) within 30 days after counsel receives notice from the Defendant Commissioner as to Plaintiffs past due benefits. (kdm)

February 8, 2011

Filing 15 ORDER GRANTING 14 MOTION for Extension of Time to File filed by ALICE FRAME. (Memorandum in Opposition due by 4/18/2011., Memorandum in Support due by 2/17/2011.). Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE GARY R JONES on 2/8/2011. (jws)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Florida Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: FRAME v. ASTRUE
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: ALICE FRAME
Represented By:	N ALBERT BACHARACH, Jr.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: MICHAEL J ASTRUE
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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?