Repnicke v. Commissioner of Social Security

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit California Eastern District Repnicke v. Commissioner of Social Security

Repnicke v. Commissioner of Social Security

Plaintiff:	Michael James Repnicke
Defendant:	Commissioner of Social Security
Case Number:	2:2016cv01225
Filed:	June 4, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office:	Sacramento Office
County:	San Joaquin
Presiding Judge:	Edmund F. Brennan
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
August 18, 2017	Filing 18 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 8/17/2017 DENYING 15 Motion for Summary Judgment; GRANTING 16 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment; The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is AFFIRMED; The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment for defendant and close this case. CASE CLOSED (Washington, S)
June 8, 2016	Filing 3 ORDER granting plaintiff's 2 Motion to Proceed IFP, signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/7/16. 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 United States Marshal (USM). Within 14 days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall submit to the USM the required documents for service. The USM is directed to serve all process without prepayment of costs not later than 60 days from the date of this order. (Kastilahn, A)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 18, 2017

Filing 18 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 8/17/2017 DENYING 15 Motion for Summary Judgment; GRANTING 16 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment; The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is AFFIRMED; The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment for defendant and close this case. CASE CLOSED (Washington, S)

June 8, 2016

Filing 3 ORDER granting plaintiff's 2 Motion to Proceed IFP, signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/7/16. 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 United States Marshal (USM). Within 14 days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall submit to the USM the required documents for service. The USM is directed to serve all process without prepayment of costs not later than 60 days from the date of this order. (Kastilahn, A)

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: Repnicke 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: Michael James Repnicke
Represented By:	Vijay Jagdish Patel
Represented By:	Lawrence David Rohlfing
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:	Bobbie J. Montoya, ss
Represented By:	Daniel P. Talbert
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?