Michele Ann Hurley v. Carolyn W. Colvin

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit California Central District Michele Ann Hurley v. Carolyn W. Colvin

Michele Ann Hurley v. Carolyn W. Colvin

Plaintiff:	Michele Ann Hurley
Defendant:	Carolyn W. Colvin
Case Number:	2:2016cv05892
Filed:	August 8, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge:	Andre Birotte
Presiding Judge:	Jean P. Rosenbluth
Nature of Suit:	Social Security: DIWC/DIWW

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
November 16, 2017	Filing 32 ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEYS FEES PURSUANT TO EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), AND COSTS, PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1920 by Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth. Re: Stipulation for Award of EAJA Fees 31 . Pursuant to the Stipulation between the parties, through their respective counsel, awarding attorneys fees under EAJA, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that EAJA fees are awarded in the amount of $4,450.00, subject to the terms of the stipulation. (bem)
August 17, 2017	Filing 30 JUDGMENT by Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth, Related to: Memorandum & Opinion, 29 . For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Decision and Order, it is hereby ADJUDGED that (1) Plaintiff's request for an order remanding t he case for further proceedings is GRANTED; (2) the Commissioner's request for an order affirming the Commissioner's final decision and dismissing the action is DENIED; and (3) judgment is entered in Plaintiff's favor. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (bem)

Date Filed

Document Text

November 16, 2017

Filing 32 ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEYS FEES PURSUANT TO EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), AND COSTS, PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1920 by Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth. Re: Stipulation for Award of EAJA Fees 31 . Pursuant to the Stipulation between the parties, through their respective counsel, awarding attorneys fees under EAJA, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that EAJA fees are awarded in the amount of $4,450.00, subject to the terms of the stipulation. (bem)

August 17, 2017

Filing 30 JUDGMENT by Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth, Related to: Memorandum & Opinion, 29 . For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Decision and Order, it is hereby ADJUDGED that (1) Plaintiff's request for an order remanding t he case for further proceedings is GRANTED; (2) the Commissioner's request for an order affirming the Commissioner's final decision and dismissing the action is DENIED; and (3) judgment is entered in Plaintiff's favor. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (bem)

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 California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Michele Ann Hurley v. Carolyn W. Colvin
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Carolyn W. Colvin
Represented By:	Patrick W Snyder
Represented By:	Assistant US Attorney LA-CV
Represented By:	Assistant US Attorney LA-SSA
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 ]
Plaintiff: Michele Ann Hurley
Represented By:	Janna K Lowenstein
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?