Jorge Ochoa v. Nancy A. Berryhill
Jorge Ochoa |
Acting Commissioner Nancy A. Berryhill and Nancy A. Berryhill |
2:2019cv03535 |
April 29, 2019 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Steve Kim |
Social Security: DIWC/DIWW |
42 U.S.C. ยง 405 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on September 15, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 12 NOTICE TO COUNSEL: ALL PARTIES having consented to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge, this case has been reassigned to Magistrate Judge Steve Kim for all further proceedings. Please use the case number 2:19-cv-03535-SK on all documents subsequently filed to ensure the proper routing of all filings. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. TEXT ONLY ENTRY. (sn) |
Filing 11 CONSENT TO PROCEED before Magistrate Judge, in accordance with Title 28 Section 636(c) and F.R.CIV.P 73(b), filed by Defendant Nancy A. Berryhill. (Attorney Lara A Bradt added to party Nancy A. Berryhill(pty:dft))(Bradt, Lara) |
Filing 10 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER RE: CONSENT TO PROCEED BEFORE U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. Plaintiff has consented to proceed before a U.S. Magistrate Judge for all proceedings (see ECF No. #9 ). Defendant is advised that, to encourage the just and speedy determination the action filed in this District, the parties may consent to have a U.S. Magistrate Judge render final judgment. By no later than June 24, 2019, Defendant shall file a completed Form CV-11 with the Clerk indicating whether Defendant does or does not join in Plaintiff's consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. (Attachments: #1 CV11- Statement of Consent) (et) |
Filing 9 CONSENT TO PROCEED before Magistrate Judge, in accordance with Title 28 Section 636(c) and F.R.CIV.P 73(b), filed by Plaintiff Jorge Ochoa. (Kalagian, Marc) |
Filing 8 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Jorge Ochoa, upon Defendant Nancy A. Berryhill served on 6/6/2019, answer due 8/5/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were Service was executed in compliance with statute not specified. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt NOT attached. Original Summons NOT returned. (Kalagian, Marc) |
Filing 7 ORDER RE: PROCEDURES IN SOCIAL SECURITY APPEAL by Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. Plaintiff will promptly serve the summons and complaint on the government in accordance with Rule 4(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff will file an appropriate proof of service no later than 90 days after the complaint is filed, although Plaintiff may file it sooner. Government counsel must file a notice of appearance within 30 days of service of the action. (see document for further details) (Attachments: #1 Blank Consent Form) (hr) |
Filing 6 60 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Nancy A. Berryhill. (et) |
Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge David O. Carter and referred to Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. (et) |
Filing 4 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Jorge Ochoa, (Kalagian, Marc) |
Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Jorge Ochoa. (Kalagian, Marc) |
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Jorge Ochoa. (Kalagian, Marc) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-23637228 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Jorge Ochoa. (Attorney Marc V Kalagian added to party Jorge Ochoa(pty:pla))(Kalagian, Marc) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.