Sam v. Social Security Administration

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit California Eastern District Sam v. Social Security Administration

Sam v. Social Security Administration

Plaintiff:	Kally Sam
Defendant:	Social Security Administration
Case Number:	2:2013cv01983
Filed:	September 23, 2013
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office:	Sacramento Office
County:	Sacramento
Presiding Judge:	Craig M. Kellison
Nature of Suit:	Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 405
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
September 29, 2015	Filing 17 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 9/29/15 Based on the foregoing, the court concludes that the Commissioner's final decision is based on substantial evidence and proper legal analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 12) is denied; Defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment (Doc. 14) is granted; and The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and close this file. (Becknal, R)
October 23, 2013	Filing 2 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 10/23/13 ORDERING that Plaintiff's request to Proceed IFP is GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to serve the undersigned's scheduling order in social security cases. The Clerk is further directed to serve a copy of this order on the USM. Within 15 days Plaintiff shall submit service documents to the USM and file a statement with the court that said documents have been submitted. (cc: USM). (Becknal, R)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 29, 2015

Filing 17 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 9/29/15 Based on the foregoing, the court concludes that the Commissioner's final decision is based on substantial evidence and proper legal analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 12) is denied; Defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment (Doc. 14) is granted; and The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and close this file. (Becknal, R)

October 23, 2013

Filing 2 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 10/23/13 ORDERING that Plaintiff's request to Proceed IFP is GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to serve the undersigned's scheduling order in social security cases. The Clerk is further directed to serve a copy of this order on the USM. Within 15 days Plaintiff shall submit service documents to the USM and file a statement with the court that said documents have been submitted. (cc: USM). (Becknal, R)

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: Sam v. Social Security Administration
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kally Sam
Represented By:	Stephen E Goldberg
Represented By:	Gary Franklin Smith
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: Social Security Administration
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?