Margarita Saldivar v. Nancy A. Berryhill
| Margarita Saldivar |
| Commissioner Social Security and Nancy A. Berryhill |
| 5:2019cv00906 |
| May 14, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Sheri Pym |
| Social Security: SSID Tit. XIV |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 24, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 NOTICE TO COUNSEL: ALL PARTIES having consented to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge, this case has been reassigned to Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym for all further proceedings. Please use the case number EDCV19-906 SP 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 12 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 In Seon Jeong added to party Nancy A. Berryhill(pty:dft))(Jeong, In) |
| Filing 11 CONSENT TO PROCEED before Magistrate Judge, in accordance with Title 28 Section 636(c) and F.R.CIV.P 73(b), (Rosales, Steven) |
| Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Margarita Saldivar, upon Defendant Nancy A. Berryhill served on 6/3/2019, answer due 10/1/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were 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 1)(Rosales, Steven) |
Filing 9
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER by Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym. PLEASE READ THIS ORDER CAREFULLY IT DIFFERS IN SOME RESPECTS FROM SIMILAR ORDERS BY OTHER JUDGES, AND FROM PREVIOUS ORDERS BY THE UNDERSIGNED MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Plaintiff shall promptly serve the summons and complaint and a copy of this order on defendant in the manner required by Rule 4(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 20 C.F.R. 423.1. Plaintiff shall thereafter promptly file a proof of service showing compliance with this paragraph, preferably within 30 days of the date of this order. Defendant's counsel shall file a notice of appearance within 30 days of service of the summons and complaint. Defendant shall electronically serve on plaintiff a complete copy of the administrative record within 90 days of the service of the complaint (SEE ORDER FOR FURTHER DETAILS). (jlo)
|
| Filing 8 60 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Nancy A. Berryhill. (et) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym: granting #3 REQUEST to Proceed in Forma Pauperis with Declaration in Support (CV-60). (kca)
|
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge George H. Wu and referred to Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym. (car) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Margarita Saldivar, (Rosales, Steven) |
| Filing 4 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Margarita Saldivar. (Rosales, Steven) |
| Filing 3 REQUEST to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Declaration in Support filed by Plaintiff Margarita Saldivar. (Rosales, Steven) |
| Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Margarita Saldivar. (Rosales, Steven) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with In Forma Pauperis request, filed by Plaintiff Margarita Saldivar. (Attorney Steven G Rosales added to party Margarita Saldivar(pty:pla))(Rosales, Steven) |
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.
