Ko v. Colvin

Plaintiff: Masako Ko
Defendant: Carolyn W Colvin
Case Number: 3:2015cv08054
Filed: April 22, 2015
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Prescott Division Office
County: Mohave
Presiding Judge: Bridget S Bade
Nature of Suit: Disability Insurance
Cause of Action: 42:405
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
June 1, 2016 39 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER: The Commissioner's decision denying benefits is reversed and this matter is remanded for a determination of benefits. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and terminate this case. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bridget S Bade on 5/31/2016. (REK)

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

Search for this case: Ko v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Masako Ko
Represented By: Rodney Oliver Salmi
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
Represented By: Martha Boden(Designation Assistant US Attorney)
Represented By: Michael A Johns(Designation Assistant US Attorney)
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.


Why Is My Information Online?