Cope v. Astrue

Plaintiff: Robert L. Cope
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 3:2009cv00225
Filed: February 6, 2009
Court: California Southern District Court
Office: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI Office
County: San Diego
Referring Judge: Cathy Ann Bencivengo
Presiding Judge: Jeffrey T. Miller
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
September 23, 2010 21 Opinion or Order of the Court CLERK'S JUDGMENT - that the court hereby adopts the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The Court hereby denies Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and grants Defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment. The Clerk of the Court is instructed to close the file (tkl)

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: Cope v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Robert L. Cope
Represented By: Thomas Garrett Roche
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
Represented By: U S Attorney CV
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?