Ricardo Jose Calderon Lopez v. Tigran Gumushyan et al
Ricardo Jose Calderon Lopez |
Tigran Gumushyan, Darryl Onizuka and Doe Vazquez |
United States of America |
Defendant Commissioner |
4:2016cv07236 |
December 19, 2016 |
US District Court for the Northern District of California |
Oakland Office |
XX US, Outside State |
Kandis A. Westmore |
Other Civil Rights |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 134 Order by Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler denying 133 Motion for Reconsideration. (lblc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/30/2017) |
Filing 131 ORDER by Judge Laurel Beeler granting 121 Motion to Dismiss. The court dismisses the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. (lblc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/16/2017) |
Filing 123 ORDER denying Mr. Lopez's request to proceed IFP on appeal. ECF Nos. 117, 120. Signed by Judge Laurel Beeler on 4/6/2017. (lblc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/6/2017) |
Filing 108 ORDER by Judge Laurel Beeler regarding ECF Nos. 100, 101, 107. Mr. Lopez already consented to magistrate-judge jurisdiction and, absent good cause or extraordinary circumstances, he cannot withdraw it. His declination at ECF No. 100 is therefore ineffective. (lblc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/9/2017) |
Filing 81 Judicial Referral for Purpose of Determining Relationship of Cases re Lopez v. Commissioner of Social Security, 16-cv-2732-LB. Signed by Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 1/17/2017. (kawlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/17/2017) |
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 Northern 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
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.