Cox v. Social Security Administration Commissioner

Case Number: 5:2006cv05057
Filed: April 3, 2006
Court: Arkansas Western District Court
Office: Fayetteville Office
Presiding Judge: Jimm Larry Hendren
Nature of Suit: Social Security: RSI Tax Suits
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Jury Demanded By: None

Docket Report

We have record of the following docket entries for this case:

Date Filed#Document Text
March 6, 2007 12 Featured Case ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 11 affirming the ALJ's decision and dismissing case w/prej. Signed by Judge Jimm Larry Hendren on 3-6-07. (ct)
February 5, 2007 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 2 Complaint filed by Carl Cox, Objections to R&R due by 2/22/2007. Signed by Judge James R. Marschewski on 2/5/07. (ct)
January 4, 2007 MEMO OF REASSIGNMENT Case Referred to Judge James R. Marschewski. Judge Beverly Stites Jones no longer assigned to the case. (rls)
September 14, 2006 10 APPEAL BRIEF (SOCIAL SECURITY) by Carl Cox. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A DOT Listing# 2 Exhibit B DOT Listing# 3 Exhibit C DOT Listing)(Cazort, Mildred)
July 25, 2006 9 APPEAL BRIEF (SOCIAL SECURITY) by Social Security Administration Commissioner. (Hawkins, Claude)
June 2, 2006 8 Order Limiting Social Security Appeal Briefs of the parties to a maximum of 20 pages. Any brief exceeding the page limitation may be stricken from the record. Signed by Judge Beverly Stites Jones on June 2, 2006. (jck)
June 2, 2006 7 SOCIAL SECURITY SCHEDULING LETTER - Plaintiff's brief (if any) is due within 30 days of the filing of the transcript and the Commissioner will have 30 days to respond. If Plaintiff does not file brief within 30 days, Commissioner has 30 days from date on which Plaintiff's brief would be due to submit brief.(jck)
June 1, 2006 This is a text only entry - No Document is attached. Paper document filed with Clerk.SOCIAL SECURITY TRANSCRIPT by Social Security Administration Commissioner. Plaintiff's SSA Appeal Brief due by 7/3/2006. Government SSA Appeal Brief due by 7/31/2006. (mfr)
June 1, 2006 6 ANSWER to Complaint by Social Security Administration Commissioner.(Hawkins, Claude)
April 7, 2006 Summons Issued as to Social Security Administration Commissioner, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General and returned to attorney/plaintiff for service (tg)
April 3, 2006 5 Featured Case ORDER granting 3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis and directing clerk to file the complaint nunc pro tunc as of 3/28/06. The plaintiff is directed to serve a copy of the complaint and this order on the defendant by certified mail, return receipt requested, as well as the US Attorney General and US Attorney for Western District/Arkansas without prepayment of fees and costs. Defendant is to answer within 60 days from date of service. . Signed by Judge Beverly Stites Jones on 3/30/06. (ct)
April 3, 2006 4 AFFIDAVIT of Carl Cox filed by Carl Cox. (ct)
April 3, 2006 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Carl Cox. (ct)
April 3, 2006 2 COMPLAINT against Social Security Administration Commissioner, filed by Carl Cox. Filed Nunc Pro Tunc as of 3/28/06. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A Notice of Appeals Council Action)(ct)
April 3, 2006 1 ***DISREGARD - RE-FILED WITH EXHIBITS***COMPLAINT against Social Security Administration Commissioner , filed by Carl Cox. Entered nunc pro tunc as of 3/28/06(ct) Modified on 4/3/2006 to show re-filing(jn).

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 Arkansas Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Cox v. Social Security Administration Commissioner
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
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?