I. M. v. Martin O'Malley
| I. M. |
| MARTIN J. O'MALLEY, Commissioner of Social Security |
| 24-2150 |
| July 3, 2024 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| S.S.I.D. |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 16, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 17
ORDER re: Motion for extension of time to file IFP motion. [ # 16 ] The motion is GRANTED only to the extent that the appellant shall either pay the $605.00 appellate filing fees in the district court or file a motion for leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis with the clerk of this court by October 7, 2024. The clerk shall send the appellant an asset affidavit form. Failure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of this appeal. CDH [17] [7399825] [24-2150] (PS) [Entered: 08/16/2024 11:13 AM]
|
| Filing 16 Pro se motion filed by Appellant I. M. to extend time to file IFP paperwork. [16] [7399673] [24-2150] (DAB) [Entered: 08/15/2024 03:24 PM] |
| Filing 15 Filed District Court order DENYING Appellant I. M. leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. Date IFP denied: 08/06/2024. Issued Circuit Rule 3(b) 30 day notice for failure to pay the docketing fee. Fee or IFP forms due on 09/06/2024 for Appellant I. M. [7397967] [15] [7397967] [24-2150] (AP) [Entered: 08/07/2024 10:44 AM] |
|
Filing 14
ORDER re: Motion to amend appellee. [ # 13 ] The motion to amend the appellee is DENIED. The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration is the proper defendant-appellee in this appeal. See Schweiker v. Chilicky , 487 U.S. 412 (1987); 20 C.F.R. 422.210(d). Appellant is warned that this court retains the authority to impose sanctions should he continue to engage in abusive and frivolous litigation practices or behavior. LCE [14] [7395718] [24-2150] (PS) [Entered: 07/25/2024 12:43 PM]
|
| Filing 13 Pro se motion filed by Appellant I. M. to amend appellee. [13] [7394951] [24-2150]--[Edited 07/22/2024 by PS - to reflect relief requested.] (CAG) [Entered: 07/22/2024 04:14 PM] |
|
Filing 12
ORDER re: 1. Motion for judicial notice. 2. Motion for affirmative relief. [ # 10 ] [ # 11 ] The court construes the motions as requests for reconsideration of the courts order dated July 15, 2024. So construed, the requests for reconsideration are DENIED. LCE [12] [7394812] [24-2150] (PS) [Entered: 07/22/2024 12:32 PM]
|
| Filing 11 Pro se motion filed by Appellant I. M.. [11] [7394405] [24-2150] (CAH) [Entered: 07/18/2024 02:53 PM] |
| Filing 10 Pro se motion filed by Appellant I. M. for judicial notice. [10] [7393609] [24-2150] (CAH) [Entered: 07/15/2024 03:30 PM] |
|
Filing 9
ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that the motion for electronic filing privileges is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to add appellees to the appeal is DENIED. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that to the extent that appellant requests to seal the appeal or any part of the appellate record, the request is DENIED. Appellant is reminded that access to documents in this appeal is restricted consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 25(a)(5) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(c). [ # 3 ] [ # 7 ] [ # 8 ] LCE [9] [7393581] [24-2150] (ER) [Entered: 07/15/2024 03:05 PM]
|
| Filing 8 Pro se motion filed by Appellant I. M. to seal case and for leave to move Federal District Court records into a HIPPAA Qualified Protective Order (QPO) and to recognize confidential protections for this appeals case. [8] [7393406] [24-2150] (JR) [Entered: 07/15/2024 10:23 AM] |
| Filing 7 Pro se motion filed by Appellant I. M. for leave to include hidden party defendants into this appeals action. [7] [7393404] [24-2150] (JR) [Entered: 07/15/2024 10:19 AM] |
| Filing 6 Pro se motion filed by Appellant I. M. for leave of court for a court appointed attorney. [6] [7392929] [24-2150] (JR) [Entered: 07/11/2024 01:38 PM] |
| Filing 5 Filed Seventh Circuit Transcript Information Sheet by Appellant I. M. [5] [7392912] [24-2150] (JR) [Entered: 07/11/2024 12:46 PM] |
| Filing 3 Pro se motion filed by Appellant I. M. for leave of court to email/e-File case documents. [3] [7392827] [24-2150] (VG) [Entered: 07/11/2024 09:49 AM] |
|
Filing 2
ORDER issued TRANSFERRING the motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis on appeal to the clerk of the District Court for ruling in the first instance. (NOTE: This filing contains the complete asset affidavit.) JR [2] [7391894] [24-2150] (CG) [Entered: 07/08/2024 10:59 AM]
|
| Filing 4 This is notification that no appellee(s) or counsel for the appellee(s) were served in the District Court. [4] [7392837] (Note: The Office of the US Attorney has been notified of the filing of the appeal.) [24-2150] (VG) [Entered: 07/11/2024 09:55 AM] |
| Filing 1 U.S. civil case docketed. IFP pending in the District Court. Docketing statement filed. Transcript information sheet due by 07/17/2024. [1] [7391883] [24-2150] (CG) [Entered: 07/08/2024 10:46 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: I. M. v. Martin O'Malley | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: MARTIN J. O'MALLEY, Commissioner of Social Security | |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: I. M. | |
| Represented By: | I. M. |
| 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.
