Alexander v. Astrue

Plaintiff: Mark Alexander
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 3:2008cv02233
Filed: December 8, 2008
Court: California Southern District Court
Office: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW Office
County: San Diego
Presiding Judge: M. James Lorenz
Referring Judge: Nita L. Stormes
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Jury Demanded By: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
November 18, 2009 18 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION and Dismissing Complaint Without Prejudice: In the absence of objections, the Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED. The complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute. Signed by Judge M. James Lorenz on 11/17/2009. (mjj) (av1).

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Alexander v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Mark Alexander
Represented By: Mary Adele Mitchell
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
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 [ 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?