Nickels v. Astrue
Rachel A. Nickels |
Michael J. Astrue |
SSA Noticing |
1:2011cv02077 |
August 9, 2011 |
US District Court for the District of Colorado |
Denver Office |
Pueblo |
John L. Kane |
Supplemental Security Income |
42 U.S.C. ยง 405 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 27 ORDER Granting 26 The Parties Stipulated Motion for Attorney Fees; Defendant shall pay to Plaintiff reasonable attorney fees in the amount of $4500; The EAJA fees will be paid to Plaintiff but are to be delivered to Plaintiffs attorney; Denying as moot 25 Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees; by Judge William J. Martinez on 12/13/2012.(ervsl, ) |
Filing 22 JUDGMENT by Clerk in favor of Rachel A. Nickels against SSA Noticing, Michael J. Astrue re: 21 Order Remanding Case for further proceedings consistent with the September 12, 2012 Order. by Edward P. Butler, Deputy Clerk on 9/17/2012. (ervsl, ) |
Filing 21 ORDER REMANDING CASE: it is ORDERED that the Commissioners final decision is VACATED and the case is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this Order. by Judge William J. Martinez on 9/12/2012. (ervsl, ) |
Filing 10 Joint Case Management Plan for Social Security Cases (ORDER) SS Plaintiffs Brief due by 1/13/2012. SS Defendants Brief due by 2/13/2012. SS Plaintiffs Reply Brief due by 2/28/2012, by Judge John L. Kane on 12/8/11. (gmssl, ) |
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 Colorado 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
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.