George Scott Fast v. Colvin
Plaintiff: George Scott Fast
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security
Case Number: 1:2017cv00086
Filed: January 18, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Fresno Office
County: Tulare
Presiding Judge: Stanley A. Boone
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 416
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
February 13, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 27 ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Social Security Appeal re 14 , 18 , signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 2/13/18. CASE CLOSED. (Gonzalez, R)
January 31, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER VACATING ORDER STRIKING UNSIGNED CONSENT FORM. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the January 30, 2018 order striking the January 29, 2018 consent form from the record (ECF No. 24) is VACATED and the case shall proceed before the undersigned and bear the case number 1:17-cv-00086-SAB. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 1/31/2018. (Hernandez, M)
January 22, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER DIRECTING Clerk of the Court to ASSIGN a District Court Judge signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 1/22/2018. The new case number is 1:17-cv-00086-LJO-SAB(PC). (Sant Agata, S)
December 13, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER DISCHARGING 17 Order to Show Cause signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 12/13/2017. (Sant Agata, S)
December 12, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANT TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PLAINTIFFS SOCIAL SECURITY APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE DEEMED UNOPPOSED OR FILE AN OPPOSITION. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within ten (10) days from the date of service of this order, Defendant shall either file a written response to this order to show cause why Plaintiffs opening brief should not be deemed unopposed or file an opposition to Plaintiffs opening brief. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 12/12/2017. (Hernandez, M)
October 27, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER RE STIPULATION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME OF 45 DAYS FOR DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S OPENING BRIEF. Defendants opposition to Plaintiffs opening brief shall be filed on or before December 11, 2017; and Plaintiffs reply, if any, shall be filed on or before December 26, 2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 10/27/2017. (Hernandez, M)
February 15, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE NOTICE OF STATUS OF SERVICE signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 2/15/2017: It is hereby ordered that Plaintiff shall file a notice within ten (10) days informing the Court of the status of service on Defendant in this action. (Valdez, E)
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: George Scott Fast v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: George Scott Fast
Represented By: Laura Eve Krank
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: Carolyn B. Chen, 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.


Why Is My Information Online?