Flores v. Astrue

Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Plaintiff: Rosario D. Flores
Case Number: 2:2012cv02192
Filed: December 24, 2012
Court: Nevada District Court
Office: Las Vegas Office
Referring Judge: Carl W. Hoffman
Presiding Judge: Robert C. Jones
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42:416 Denial of Social Security Benefits
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
October 30, 2014 19 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER adopting 18 Report and Recommendations and denying 8 Motion to Remand to Social Security Administration. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that 10 Defendant's Cross-Motion to Affirm be GRANTED. The Clerk enters judgment accordingly and close the case. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 10/30/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DKJ)

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 Nevada District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Flores v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ 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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Rosario D. Flores
Represented By: Leonard H Stone
Represented By: Marc V Kalagian
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 [ 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 were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.