Saucedo v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Yolanda Saucedo
Defendant: Michael Astrue
Case Number: 1:2007cv00129
Filed: July 6, 2007
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Office: Abilene Office
County: Taylor
Presiding Judge: Philip R Lane
Nature of Suit: Social Security: RSI Tax Suits
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)
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
September 16, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 34 Memorandum Opinion and Order. the decision of the Commissioner denying Plaintiff's applications for a period of disability insurance benefits is affirmed. Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed with prejudice. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Philip R Lane on 9/16/08) (jgf)
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 Texas Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Saucedo 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: Yolanda Saucedo
Represented By: Cheryl Chapman Langston
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 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?