Bondarenko v. Colvin

Plaintiff: Olga S Bondarenko
Defendant: Carolyn W Colvin
Case Number: 2:2013cv00154
Filed: April 22, 2013
Court: Washington Eastern District Court
Office: Spokane Office
County: Spokane
Presiding Judge: Cynthia Imbrogno
Nature of Suit: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
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
August 22, 2014 22 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 17 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Magistrate Judge John T. Rodgers. (MO, Courtroom Deputy)
August 22, 2014 23 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT in favor of Olga S Bondarenko against Carolyn W Colvin. (MO, Courtroom Deputy)

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

Search for this case: Bondarenko v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Olga S Bondarenko
Represented By: Maureen J Rosette
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 were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.