Marrs-Espinoza v. Saul
Valerie J. Marrs-Espinoza |
Andrew M. Saul |
5:2021cv02375 |
April 1, 2021 |
US District Court for the Northern District of California |
Virginia K DeMarchi |
Social Security: DIWC/DIWW |
42 U.S.C. ยง 416 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on May 14, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 9 Filing fee paid: $ 100.00, receipt number 34611154380. (dhmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/14/2021) |
Filing 8 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Valerie J. Marrs-Espinoza.. (Weems, Robert) (Filed on 4/19/2021) |
Filing 7 CLERK'S NOTICE Re: Consent or Declination: Plaintiffs/Defendants 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 5/3/2021. (pmcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/19/2021) |
Filing 6 Order by Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi denying #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Plaintiff shall pay a reduced filing fee of $100.00. Partial Filing Fee Due by May 3, 2021. (vkdlc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/2/2021) |
Filing 5 Scheduling Order. Signed by Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi on 4/2/2021. (vkdlc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/2/2021) |
Filing 4 SOCIAL SECURITY PROCEDURAL ORDER: (dhmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/1/2021) |
Filing 3 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi. 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 4/15/2021. (asS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/1/2021) |
Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Valerie J. Marrs-Espinoza. (Weems, Robert) (Filed on 4/1/2021) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Andrew M. Saul. Filed byValerie J. Marrs-Espinoza. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Weems, Robert) (Filed on 4/1/2021) |
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: Marrs-Espinoza v. Saul | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Valerie J. Marrs-Espinoza | |
Represented By: | Robert Chipley Weems |
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: Andrew M. Saul | |
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.