Deisenroth v. Berryhill
| Scott D. Deisenroth |
| Nancy A. Berryhill |
| 3:2019cv00614 |
| February 4, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| William H Orrick |
| Social Security: DIWC/DIWW |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1383 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 26, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Nancy A. Berryhill.. (Marriott, Michael) (Filed on 3/26/2019) |
Filing 14
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge William H. Orrick for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen no longer assigned to the case. This case is assigned to a judge who participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras. Signed by Clerk on 3/7/19. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/7/2019)
|
| Filing 13 CLERK'S NOTICE OF IMPENDING REASSIGNMENT TO A U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: The Clerk of this Court will now randomly reassign this case to a District Judge because either (1) a party has not consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge, or (2) time is of the essence in deciding a pending judicial action for which the necessary consents to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction have not been secured. You will be informed by separate notice of the district judge to whom this case is reassigned. ALL HEARING DATES PRESENTLY SCHEDULED BEFORE THE CURRENT MAGISTRATE JUDGE ARE VACATED AND SHOULD BE RE-NOTICED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE JUDGE TO WHOM THIS CASE IS REASSIGNED. This is a text only docket entry; there is no document associated with this notice. (djmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/7/2019) |
| Filing 12 *** DUPLICATE DOCKET ENTRY *** please see #11 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Scott D. Deisenroth.. (Sackett, Harvey) (Filed on 3/6/2019) Modified text on 3/7/2019 (cv, COURT STAFF). |
| Filing 11 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Scott D. Deisenroth.. (Sackett, Harvey) (Filed on 3/4/2019) |
| Filing 10 CLERK'S NOTICE Re: Consent or Declination: Plaintiffs shall file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge. Note that any party is free to withhold consent to proceed before a magistrate judge without adverse substantive consequences. The forms are available at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/civilforms. Consent/Declination due by 3/11/2019. (djmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/25/2019) |
| Filing 9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Scott D. Deisenroth. Nancy A. Berryhill served on 2/14/2019, answer due 4/15/2019. (Sackett, Harvey) (Filed on 2/18/2019) |
| Filing 8 Summons Issued as to Nancy A. Berryhill, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2019) |
| Filing 7 Proposed Summons. (Sackett, Harvey) (Filed on 2/6/2019) |
| Filing 6 FEE PAID (Filing fee$400,receipt number 0971-13068627). (Sackett, Harvey) (Filed on 2/6/2019) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER DENYING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS - Plaintiff must pay the $400 filing fee no later than 30 days from the date of this Order.Re: Dkt. No. #2 . Signed by Judge Susan van Keulen on 02/05/19.(djmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2019) Modified on 2/5/2019 (cv, COURT STAFF).
|
| Filing 4 SOCIAL SECURITY PROCEDURAL ORDER: (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2019) |
| Filing 3 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. Counsel is required to send chambers a copy of the initiating documents pursuant to L.R. 5-1(e)(7). A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 2/19/2019. (bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/4/2019) |
| Filing 2 First MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Scott D. Deisenroth. (Sackett, Harvey) (Filed on 2/4/2019) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW OF DECISION OF COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY (Administrative Procedure Act Case) against Nancy A. Berryhill. Filed byScott D. Deisenroth. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Sackett, Harvey) (Filed on 2/4/2019) |
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 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
| Search for this case: Deisenroth v. Berryhill | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Scott D. Deisenroth | |
| 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: Nancy A. Berryhill | |
| Represented By: | Michael Kramer Marriott |
| 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.
