Spagnolo v. United States Social Security Administration et al
Nick Spagnolo |
Michael J. Astrue and United States Social Security Administration |
1:2012cv00314 |
June 1, 2012 |
US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
Hawaii Office |
Honolulu |
KEVIN S.C. CHANG |
SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY |
Supplemental Security Income |
42 U.S.C. ยง 402 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 6 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 6/13/12. -- "Spagnolo may respond to this Order to Show Cause in writing by Tuesday, July 3, 2012. Any response is limited to 9,000 words. A hearing on the Order to Show Cause Why Action Should Not Be Dismissed is scheduled for September 18, 2012 at 11:15 a.m. before this judge. If Spagnolo fails to timely respond to this Order to Show Cause, the court may dismiss this action wit hout holding a hearing. If the court holds a hearing, Spagnolo may, if he so desires, appear by telephone." Show Cause Hearing set for 9/18/2012 11:15 AM before CHIEF JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY. Show Cause Response due by 7/3 /2012. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Nick Spagnolo served by first class mail at the address of record on June 13, 2012. |
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 Hawaii District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.