Alvarado Martinez v. Saul
| Nila Lisa Alvarado Martinez |
| Andrew W. Saul |
| Social Security Administration |
| 3:2019cv01017 |
| June 27, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Sarah A L Merriam |
| Robert A Richardson |
| Stefan R Underhill |
| Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1383 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 3, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
SCHEDULING ORDER: Plaintiff's dispositive motion is due by 10/11/2019. See attached order for important instructions. Signed by Judge Robert A. Richardson on 8/19/2019. (Fries, J.)
|
| Filing 12 Social Security Transcripts by Andrew W. Saul. (Lechleitner, Andreea) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE of Appearance by Andreea Lechleitner on behalf of Andrew W. Saul (Lechleitner, Andreea) |
|
Filing 10
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Robert A. Richardson on 6/28/19.(Blue, A.)
|
| Filing 9 CONSENT to Jurisdiction by US Magistrate Judge by Nila Lisa Alvarado Martinez, Andrew W. Saul. Case reassigned to Magistrate Judge Robert A. Richardson. This matter has been transferred to a magistrate judge. All non-efiled submissions should be filed at the seat of court where the magistrate judge presides. The case number will remain the same, but must be followed by the magistrate judge's initials. Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 6/28/2019.(Anastasio, F.) |
|
Filing 8
ORDER granting #3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff has filed a motion seeking to proceed without payment of fees and costs, which motion includes a sworn statement as to plaintiff's current financial circumstances. See Doc. #3 . Plaintiff has completed the required information. Plaintiff asserts that she is unable to afford to pay fees and costs, having little income, all of which is in the form of government benefits, and minimal assets. See generally id. at 3-5. Plaintiff also states that she lives in Section 8 housing and receives SNAP benefits. See id. at 4-5. At this stage, such allegations are sufficient to establish that plaintiff is unable to pay the ordinary filing fees required by the Court. 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(1). Accordingly, plaintiff's #3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Sarah A. L. Merriam on 6/28/2019. (Katz, S.)
|
|
Filing 7
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 6/27/2019.(Reis, Julia)
|
|
Filing 6
STANDING SCHEDULING ORDER Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 6/27/2019.(Reis, Julia)
|
|
Filing 5
Standing Order on Social Security Appeals Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 6/27/2019. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form)(Reis, Julia)
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE re: Consent to Magistrate Judge by Nila Lisa Alvarado Martinez (Reis, Julia) |
| Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Nila Lisa Alvarado Martinez. Motions referred to Sarah A. L. Merriam (Reis, Julia) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Ivan Michael Katz on behalf of Nila Lisa Alvarado Martinez (Reis, Julia) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Andrew W. Saul, filed by Nila Lisa Alvarado Martinez. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Reis, Julia) |
| Answer deadline updated for Andrew W. Saul to 8/26/2019. (Reis, Julia) |
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 Connecticut 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.
