Douglas v. Commissioner of Social Security
Plaintiff: Craig Douglas
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security
Case Number: 2:2014cv02605
Filed: November 6, 2014
Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: San Joaquin
Presiding Judge: Dale A. Drozd
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405
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
July 5, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 25 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 7/5/16 ORDERING that Plaintiff's MOTION for Attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act 23] is GRANTED. Plaintiff is awarded $8,666.41 in attorney fees and $15.39 in costs under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d); and Defendant shall determine whether Plaintiff's EAJA Attorney's fees are subject to any offset permitted under the United States Department of the Treasury's Offset Program and, if the fees are not subject to an offset, shall honor Plaintiff's assignment of EAJA fees and shall cause the payment of fees to be made directly to Plaintiff's counsel pursuant to the assignment executed by Plaintiff.(Mena-Sanchez, L)
March 25, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 3/25/16 ORDERING that Plaintiff's 14 motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part. Defendant's 20 cross-motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part. The Commissioner's decision is reversed; and this matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this order. CASE CLOSED (Kastilahn, A)
October 19, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 18 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/16/2015 ORDERING 17 that Defendant's time to respond to the motion for summary judgment is EXTENDED to 11/15/2015. (Reader, L)
September 15, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 16 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/14/2015 ORDERING that Defendant's time to respond to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is EXTENDED to 10/15/2015. (Zignago, K.)
January 26, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/23/2015 ORDERING that Plaintiff's 2 Motion to Proceed IFP is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to issue process and to serve upon plaintiff the undersigned's Scheduling Orde r and Order re Consent or Request for Reassignment for social security cases. Plaintiff shall serve process and copies of the undersigneds Scheduling Order and Order re Consent or Request for Reassignment not later than sixty (60) days from the date of this order. (Zignago, K.)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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: Douglas 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: Craig Douglas
Represented By: Harvey Peter Sackett
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
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?