Bobby Lee Marshall v. Andrew M. Saul
Plaintiff: Bobby Lee Marshall
Defendant: Andrew M. Saul
Case Number: 2:2020cv09185
Filed: October 7, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Douglas F McCormick
Referring Judge: James V Selna
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on November 16, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 25, 2020 Filing 10 CONSENT TO PROCEED before Magistrate Judge, in accordance with Title 28 Section 636(c) and F.R.CIV.P 73(b), filed by Plaintiff Bobby Lee Marshall. (Lewis, James)
November 4, 2020 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 Defendant Andrew M. Saul. (Attorney Patrick W Snyder added to party Andrew M. Saul(pty:dft))(Snyder, Patrick)
October 28, 2020 Filing 8 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Bobby Lee Marshall, upon Defendant Andrew M. Saul served on 10/15/2020, answer due 12/14/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to C. Tower. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by delivering a copy to illegible signature and no title given. Executed upon the officer agency or corporation by delivering a copy to illegible name and no title offered. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt attached. Original Summons NOT returned. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Certified Mail Receipts)(Lewis, James)
October 9, 2020 Filing 7 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge James V. Selna and referred to Magistrate Judge Douglas F. McCormick. (car)
October 9, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 6 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS Order Re Procedures in Social Security Appeal by Magistrate Judge Douglas F. McCormick. (nbo)
October 8, 2020 Filing 5 60 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Andrew M. Saul. (car)
October 7, 2020 Filing 4 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Bobby Lee Marshall, identifying none identified. (Lewis, James)
October 7, 2020 Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Bobby Lee Marshall. (Lewis, James)
October 7, 2020 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Bobby Lee Marshall. (Lewis, James)
October 7, 2020 Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-28423837 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Bobby Lee Marshall. (Attorney James B Lewis added to party Bobby Lee Marshall(pty:pla))(Lewis, James)

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: Bobby Lee Marshall v. Andrew M. Saul
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Bobby Lee Marshall
Represented By: James B Lewis
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 ]
Defendant: Andrew M. Saul
Represented By: Assistant US Attorney LA-SSA
Represented By: Assistant US Attorney LA-CV
Represented By: Patrick W Snyder
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?