Rochon v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Charles Rochon
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 3:2009cv00373
Filed: February 25, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of California
Office: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW Office
County: San Diego
Presiding Judge: Marilyn L. Huff
Presiding Judge: Louisa S. Porter
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Jury Demanded By: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
November 24, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER denying 17 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 19 Cross Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Marilyn L. Huff on 11/24/2009. (ag)
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: Rochon v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Charles Rochon
Represented By: Henry Reynolds
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: 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 [ 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.


Why Is My Information Online?