DRAKE v. COLVIN

Plaintiff: MATTHEW DRAKE
Defendant: CAROLYN W. COLVIN
Case Number: 5:2013cv02600
Filed: May 13, 2013
Court: Pennsylvania Eastern District Court
Office: Allentown Office
County: Lancaster
Presiding Judge: ROBERT F. KELLY
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
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
March 2, 2015 19 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ARE OVERRULED; THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; THE PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR REVIEW IS DENIED; AND JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT AND AGAINST PLAINTIFF. SIGNED BY HONORABLE ROBERT F. KELLY ON 3/2/15. 3/2/15 ENTERED & E-MAILED.(fdc)

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 Pennsylvania Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: DRAKE v. COLVIN
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: MATTHEW DRAKE
Represented By: ROBERT SAVOY
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 ]
Defendant: CAROLYN W. COLVIN
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 should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.