April J. Michles v. Nancy A. Berryhill
April J. Michles |
Acting Commissioner Nancy A. Berryhill and Nancy A. Berryhill |
5:2019cv00943 |
May 21, 2019 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Alka Sagar |
Social Security: DIWC/DIWW |
42 U.S.C. ยง 405 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on February 16, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 13 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff April J. Michles, upon Defendant Nancy A. Berryhill served on 6/5/2019, answer due 10/3/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to F. DeLaRosa, Title Unknown,. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by delivering a copy to Carly Sase, Title Unknown,. The officer agency or corporation was NOT served. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt attached. Original Summons NOT returned. Case Management Orders were also served along with Complaint documents. (Attachments: #1 Certified Mail Return Receipts)(Kuntz, William) |
Filing 12 (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. The Court ORDERS Plaintiff to 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 within seven (7) days of the date of this Order. All other deadlines of the CMO remain in effect. (see document for further details) (hr) |
Filing 11 NOTICE TO COUNSEL: ALL PARTIES having consented to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge, this case has been reassigned to Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar for all further proceedings. Please use the case number EDCV19-943 AS 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 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 April J. Michles. (Kuntz, William) |
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 Nancy A. Berryhill. (Attorney Annabelle J Yang added to party Nancy A. Berryhill(pty:dft))(Yang, Annabelle) |
Filing 8 ORDER RE: PROCEDURES IN SOCIAL SECURITY APPEAL by Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. (see document for details) (hr) |
Filing 7 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Cormac J. Carney and referred to Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. (ghap) |
Filing 6 60 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Nancy A. Berryhill. (ghap) |
Filing 5 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff April J. Michles. (Kuntz, William) |
Filing 4 NOTICE of Related Case(s) filed by Plaintiff April J. Michles. Related Case(s): EDCV14-00343-AS and EDCV16-02385-AS (Kuntz, William) |
Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff April J. Michles, identifying Unitied States of America and Social Security Administration. (Kuntz, William) |
Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff April J. Michles. (Kuntz, William) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-23775146 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff April J. Michles. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A) (Attorney William M Kuntz added to party April J. Michles(pty:pla))(Kuntz, William) |
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.