Shackleford v. Saul
Dave Shackleford |
Andrew M. Saul |
Social Security Administration |
3:2019cv01278 |
August 16, 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. § 0405 dc |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 10, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
|
Filing 10 CONSENT to Jurisdiction by US Magistrate Judge by Andrew M. Saul, Dave Shackleford. 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 9/26/2019.(Anastasio, F.) |
Filing 9 NOTICE by Dave Shackleford Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction (Yelner, Olia) |
|
Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by James Desir on behalf of Andrew M. Saul (Desir, James) |
|
|
|
|
Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Dave Shackleford. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit)(Yelner, Olia) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Andrew M. Saul, Social Security Administration, filed by Dave Shackleford.(Yelner, Olia) |
Answer deadline updated for Andrew M. Saul to 10/15/2019. (Fazekas, J.) |
Judge Stefan R Underhill and Judge Sarah A. L. Merriam added. Motions referred to Sarah A. L. Merriam (Oliver, T.) |
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.