Vue v. Commissioner of Social Security
| Tou Vue |
| Commissioner of Social Security |
| 1:2016cv00155 |
| February 3, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Fresno Office |
| Merced |
| Barbara A. McAuliffe |
| Disability Insurance |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
34
ORDER Granting 31 Motion for Attorney Fees signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 04/30/2019. (Flores, E)
|
|
Filing
30
ORDER Denying Defendant's Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 12/27/2018. As the Commissioner has failed to demonstrate that amendment of the judgment is necessary to "correct manifest errors of law or fact upon which the judgment rests" or to "prevent manifest injustice," the Motion to Amend the Judgment (Doc. 24 ) is DENIED. (Valdez, E)
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER Reversing Agency's Denial of Benefits and Ordering Remand signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 08/03/2017. CASE CLOSED.(Flores, E)
|
|
Filing
19
STIPULATION and ORDER for an Extension of Time: that Defendant shall have a 45-day extension, or until March 7, 2017, in which to file an Opposition to Plaintiff's Opening Brief; and that all other deadlines set forth in the Case Management Order shall be extended accordingly. signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 1/19/2017. (Herman, H)
|
|
Filing
16
STIPULATION and ORDER Extending Briefing Schedule: Plaintiff's opening brief is now due on or before December 21, 2016. The Court's Scheduling Order (Doc. 6) is modified accordingly. signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 11/22/2016. (Herman, H)
|
|
Filing
13
STIPULATION and ORDER Extending Briefing Schedule: On August 16, 2016, the parties filed a stipulation for Plaintiff to have an extension of time to submit a confidential brief. (Doc. 12). The Scheduling Order allows a single thirty-day extension by the stipulation of parties (Doc. 6 at 4), and this is the first extension requested by the parties. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: (1.) Plaintiffs request for an extension of time is GRANTED. (2.) Plaintiff SHALL serve a confidential letter brief on or before September 14, 2016. signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 8/17/2016. (Herman, H)
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER Granting 3 Motion to Proceed IFP signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 02/03/2016. (Flores, E)
|
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 Eastern 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
| Search for this case: Vue v. Commissioner of Social Security | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Tou Vue | |
| Represented By: | Kelsey Mackenzie Brown |
| 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: Commissioner of Social Security | |
| Represented By: | Timothy Bolin, GOVT |
| 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.
