(SS) Flaherty v. Commissioner of Social Security
| Amanda K. Flaherty |
| Commissioner of Social Security |
| 2:2021cv01694 |
| September 17, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Kendall J Newman |
| Social Security: DIWC/DIWW |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 12, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy for Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/21/2021: On September 17, 2021, plaintiff filed a complaint against the Commissioner of Social Security and paid the filing fee. (ECF No. #1 .) The court now issues the following administrative orders: 1. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to serve the summons and complaint under the new e-service procedure for Social Security cases, if this has not been done already. (http://www.caed.uscourts.gov/caednew/index.cfm/news/new-social-security-case-procedures-effective-after-june-15-2021/) Under the E-Service program, once a summons is issued, the Clerk of Court shall deliver to the Commissioner of Social Security Administration and the United States Attorney's Office at their designated email addresses a notice of electronic filing of the action along with the summons and complaint. The Commissioner has agreed not to raise a defense of insufficient service of process if provided with notice of a complaint as detailed in this order. This order is not intended to prevent parties from making any other motions that are appropriate under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 2. This action is STAYED pursuant to General Order No. 615, until such time as the Commissioner is able to file a certified copy of the administrative record. See E.D. Cal. G.O. No. 615, Paragraphs 6, 10. (Text Only Entry)(Waldrop, A) |
Filing 3
ORDER RE CONSENT in SOCIAL SECURITY APPEAL. Consent or Decline due by 12/20/2021. (cc Commissioner of Social Security) (Attachments: #1 Consent Form) (Huang, H)
|
| Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Commissioner of Social Security* with answer to complaint due within *60* days. Attorney *Jacqueline Anna Forslund* *Forslund Law LLC* *P.O. Box 4476* *Sunriver, OR 97707*. (cc Commissioner of Social Security) (Huang, H) |
| Filing 1 SOCIAL SECURITY COMPLAINT against Commissioner of Social Security by Amanda K. Flaherty. (Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ACAEDC-9824809) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Forslund, Jacqueline) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: (SS) Flaherty 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: Amanda K. Flaherty | |
| Represented By: | Jacqueline Anna Forslund |
| 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.
