Japa v. Commissioner of Social Security

Justia Dockets & Filings Second Circuit New York Eastern District Japa v. Commissioner of Social Security

Japa v. Commissioner of Social Security

Plaintiff:	Gustavo Japa
Defendant:	Commissioner of Social Security
Case Number:	1:2009cv01108
Filed:	March 23, 2009
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office:	Social Security: DIWC/DIWW Office
County:	Kings
Presiding Judge:	Dora Lizette Irizarry
Nature of Suit:	None
Cause of Action:	U.S. Government Defendant
Jury Demanded By:	42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)

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
December 13, 2010	Filing 24 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS - For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN SUMMARY ORDER, the court will not remand this matter to the Commissioner for consideration of the new evidence presented by pr o se plaintiff. Accordingly, the court incorporates herein the "substantial evidence" discussion in its Summary Order of September 24, 2010, and grants the Commissioners motion for judgment on the pleadings. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Electronic Order and the Attached Written Summary to pro se plaintiff. The Clerk of the Court is further directed to close this case and enter judgment on behalf of the defendant. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 12/13/2010. (Irizarry, Dora)
September 24, 2010	Filing 20 ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE 15 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; AND TERMINATING AS MOOT 18 Motion to Expedite -- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, defendant's motion for judgment on the pleading s is denied, without prejudice, as pro se plaintiff is granted thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, i.e., no later than October 25, 2010, to: (1) submit evidence which supports his assertions that in "August 2009, [he] was found disabled by human resources administration and [his] personal physician, Dr. Galina Isakof"; and (2) satisfy the requirements for the consideration of new evidence. If plaintiff fails to comply timely, the court, without further proceedings, wi ll convert this ruling to an order granting the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings consistent with the "substantial evidence" standard discussed in the Attached Written Memorandum and Order. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Electronic Order and the Attached Written Memorandum and Order to pro se plaintiff. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 9/24/2010. (Irizarry, Dora)

Date Filed

Document Text

December 13, 2010

Filing 24 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS - For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN SUMMARY ORDER, the court will not remand this matter to the Commissioner for consideration of the new evidence presented by pr o se plaintiff. Accordingly, the court incorporates herein the "substantial evidence" discussion in its Summary Order of September 24, 2010, and grants the Commissioners motion for judgment on the pleadings. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Electronic Order and the Attached Written Summary to pro se plaintiff. The Clerk of the Court is further directed to close this case and enter judgment on behalf of the defendant. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 12/13/2010. (Irizarry, Dora)

September 24, 2010

Filing 20 ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE 15 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; AND TERMINATING AS MOOT 18 Motion to Expedite -- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, defendant's motion for judgment on the pleading s is denied, without prejudice, as pro se plaintiff is granted thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, i.e., no later than October 25, 2010, to: (1) submit evidence which supports his assertions that in "August 2009, [he] was found disabled by human resources administration and [his] personal physician, Dr. Galina Isakof"; and (2) satisfy the requirements for the consideration of new evidence. If plaintiff fails to comply timely, the court, without further proceedings, wi ll convert this ruling to an order granting the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings consistent with the "substantial evidence" standard discussed in the Attached Written Memorandum and Order. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Electronic Order and the Attached Written Memorandum and Order to pro se plaintiff. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 9/24/2010. (Irizarry, Dora)

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 New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Japa v. Commissioner of Social Security
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Gustavo Japa
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: Commissioner of Social Security
Represented By:	SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION - GENERIC
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?