Lilak v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration et al
Plaintiff: Safdar Neil Lilak
Defendant: Commissioner, Social Security Administration and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Interested Party: SSA Noticing and USAO-SS-Noticing
Case Number: 1:2022cv01121
Filed: May 5, 2022
Court: U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
Presiding Judge: Marcia S Krieger
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on June 14, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
June 14, 2022 Filing 11 Conventionally Submitted Material : CD of Petition for Mandamus re #10 "Case De Novo" by Plaintiff Safdar Neil Lilak. Location A-1-4 Clerk's Office. Text Only Entry (sdunb, )
June 14, 2022 Filing 10 "Case De Novo" Judicial Review of All Judicial Matters Pending and Need to Be Resolved from Last 22+ Years of Damages, Injuries, Wage Lose, Lost Health and Career by Plaintiff Safdar Neil Lilak (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Envelope)(sdunb, )
May 20, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER denying #2 Motion for Order: Mr. Lilak previously filed motions seeking to vacate his conviction and sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2555 in his criminal case, U.S. v. Lilak, D.C. Colo. Cr. Case No. 12-cr-00454-WYD. See Docket #60, 61, 74 in that case. The Court denied Mr. Lilak's first set of motions as untimely, see Docket #62, and denied his subsequent motion as a premature second or successive motion filed without Circuit Court permission pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2555(h), see Docket #77. Mr. Lilak's current motion suffers from the same defect as his prior motion: because he has already sought relief under 28 U.S.C. 2555 in the past at least once, 2255(h) now requires that Mr. Lilak must seek and obtain permission from the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals to file any new motions seeking to vacate his criminal conviction or sentence. Mr. Lilak does not indicate that he has obtained such permission, and as a result, this Court lacks the jurisdiction to consider his current motion. See U.S. v. Nelson, 465 F.3d 1145, 1148 (10th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES Mr. Lilaks Motion to Vacate #2 , finding that this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider that motion. By Judge Marcia S. Krieger on 5/20/22.(msklc2, )
May 12, 2022 Filing 8 Conventionally Submitted Material : CD-R of Backup of Case by Plaintiff Safdar Neil Lilak. Located in Clerk's Office A-1-4. Text Only Entry (sdunb, )
May 12, 2022 Filing 7 Plaintiff's Response Appeal to Social Security Office of General Counsel of General Law, Dated March 3, 2022. April 26, 2022 by Plaintiff Safdar Neil Lilak. (Attachments: #1 Attachment, #2 Envelope)(sdunb, )
May 5, 2022 Filing 6 Filing fee: $ 402, receipt number COX103071 (sdunb, )
May 5, 2022 Filing 5 Administrative Notice: Social Security Case Service. Pursuant to the Letter of Agreement signed by the Clerk, U.S. District Court;U.S. Attorneys Office for the District of Colorado (USAO), and Social Security Administration (SSA), service of the initiating document(s) by the plaintiff to the SSA, the U.S. Attorney General, and USAO in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(i) is not necessary unless the court otherwise orders. A summons is not required and will not be issued. (Text Only Entry) (norlin, )
May 5, 2022 Filing 4 Magistrate Judge consent form issued pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c). (norlin, )
May 5, 2022 Filing 3 Case assigned to Judge Marcia S. Krieger. Text Only Entry (norlin, )
May 5, 2022 Filing 2 A MOTION to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by Plaintiff Safdar Neil Lilak. (norlin, )
May 5, 2022 Filing 1 Plaintiff's Appeal to Social Security Office of General Counsel of General Law by Plaintiff Safdar Neil Lilak. Filing Fee $402.00, Receipt Number: COX103091 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6)(norlin, )

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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 this case: Lilak v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Safdar Neil Lilak
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Commissioner, Social Security Administration
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Interested party: SSA Noticing
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Interested party: USAO-SS-Noticing
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 [ 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?