Malangone v. Kijakazi
| Carrie-Ann Malangone |
| Kilolo Kijakazi |
| Social Security Administration |
| 3:2022cv00719 |
| May 27, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Thomas O Farrish |
| Stefan R Underhill |
| Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 22, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
SCHEDULING ORDER: The Government having filed its administrative record (Doc. No. 7), the court hereby enters the following Scheduling Order: Plaintiff shall file a motion to reverse and/or remand, supporting memorandum of law, and statement of material facts on or before September 19, 2022. Defendant shall file a motion to affirm or a motion for voluntary remand, supporting memorandum of law, and statement of material facts on or before November 18, 2022. Plaintiff may file a reply brief pursuant to Local Rule 7(d) on or before December 2, 2022. Prior to the filing of any dispositive motions, counsel are encouraged to confer regarding the merits of the case in an effort to determine whether a reversal and voluntary remand are appropriate. The court reminds the parties of the previously filed Standing Scheduling Order which sets forth page limits and form and content requirements for motions, supporting memoranda, and statement of materials facts. (Doc. No. 4) The parties should avoid boilerplate discussions of the governing legal standards as the court is familiar with the standard of review and the sequential evaluation process employed in the analysis of Social Security disability applications. The parties should focus on informing the court of relevant and controlling legal authority and applying it to the facts of this case. Motions filed by the parties must comply with the requirements set forth above and in the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Failure to comply may result in denial of the motion. Requests for extensions of these deadlines are discouraged and, unless unusual circumstances dictate otherwise, counsel should not seek an extension of greater than 30 days. Any motion for extension of a deadline must include a showing of good cause as required by Local Rule 7(b)(2) and must be filed at least three days before the existing deadline. Dispositive Motions due by 9/19/2022 Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 7/22/22. (Caldero, M.)
|
| Filing 7 Social Security Transcripts. (Attachments: #1 CAR part 2 of 2)(Fitzhugh, Nicol) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Nicol Fitzhugh on behalf of Kilolo Kijakazi (Fitzhugh, Nicol) |
|
Filing 5
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 5/27/2022.(Carr, Dave)
|
|
Filing 4
STANDING SCHEDULING ORDER Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 5/27/2022.(Carr, Dave)
|
|
Filing 3
STANDING ORDER ON SOCIAL SECURITY APPEALS Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 5/27/2022. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form)(Carr, Dave)
|
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Ivan Michael Katz on behalf of Carrie-Ann Malangone (Carr, Dave) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Kilolo Kijakazi, filed by Carrie-Ann Malangone. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Carr, Dave) |
| Answer deadline updated for Kilolo Kijakazi to 7/26/2022. (Carr, Dave) |
| Filing fee received from Carrie-Ann Malangone: $ 402.00, receipt number NHV25063 (Carr, Dave) Modified on 6/1/2022 to add receipt # (Carr, Dave). |
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.
