Martin Romero v. Carolyn W. Colvin
Plaintiff: Martin Romero
Defendant: Carolyn W Colvin
Case Number: 5:2013cv00853
Filed: May 8, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Paul L. Abrams
Presiding Judge: John F. Walter
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
February 13, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 16 JUDGMENT by Magistrate Judge Paul L. Abrams, IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that the decision of the defendant, the Commissioner of Social Security Administration, is affirmed consistent with the Memorandum Opinion. 15 (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (es)
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: Martin Romero 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: Assistant US Attorney LA-SSA
Represented By: Assistant US Attorney LA-CV
Represented By: Timothy R Bolin
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: Martin Romero
Represented By: William M Kuntz
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?