Rodriguez v. Kijakazi
| Hector Rodriguez |
| Kilolo Kijakazi |
| Social Security Administration |
| 3:2022cv01577 |
| December 12, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Michael P Shea |
| Robert M Spector |
| 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 February 8, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 16
The Government having filed the administrative record on February 8, 2023, the Court hereby enters the following Scheduling Order:The plaintiff shall file a motion to reverse and/or remand and supporting memorandum of law no later than March 8, 2023. The Commissioner shall then have until April 8, 2023 to file a motion to affirm or a motion for voluntary remand. Within 14 days after the Commissioner files its motion, the plaintiff may file a reply pursuant to Local Rule 7(d).Prior to the filing of any dispositive motions, the parties 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 Order which sets forth page limits and form and content requirements for motions and supporting memoranda. In addition to complying with these requirements, memoranda 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 instead 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, in the Standing Order, and in the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Failure to comply may result in denial of the motion.Any motion for extension of a deadline must comply with the Social Security Standing Order and Local Rule 7(b)(2) and must be filed at least three (3) days before the existing deadline. Signed by Judge Robert M. Spector on February 8, 2023. (Briskin, Corey)
|
| Filing 15 Social Security Transcripts. (Attachments: #1 Part 2, #2 Part 3)(Pollack, Kathryn) |
| Filing 14 Absent consent to a Magistrate Judge, this cases is referred to Magistrate Judge Robert M. Spector for all purposes including issuing a Recommended Ruling. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 1/9/2023.(Anastasio, F.) |
|
Filing 13
ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge Maria E. Garcia on 1/6/2023. (Lefevre, Arthur)
|
| Filing 12 RESPONSE to Order re: Motion IFP filed by Hector Rodriguez. (Yelner, Olia) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE TO COUNSEL/SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES: In accord with the Supplemental Rules for Social Security Review Actions Under 42 U.S.C. 405(g), effective December 1, 2022, a new Standing Order on Social Security Cases governing cases filed on or after December 1, 2022 has been filed in this case. Please note the deadlines set forth therein. Signed by Clerk on 12/19/22.(Ruocco, M.) |
|
Filing 10
STANDING ORDER RE: SOCIAL SECURITY CASES Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 12/19/22.(Ruocco, M.)
|
|
Filing 9
REMINDER: Standing Order on Social Security Appeals Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 12/16/2022. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form)(Anastasio, F.)
|
| Filing 8 NOTICE OF INSUFFICIENCY. Plaintiff's financial affidavit in support of his motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis does not clearly explain the gross weekly income he earns from his current employment. Plaintiff must establish he is "unable to pay" by providing the Court the full picture of his financial situation. 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(1). Therefore, Plaintiff must either (a) pay the filing fee or (b) submit a revised financial affidavit clarifying the calculation of his current income. If Plaintiff chooses to submit a revised financial affidavit, he must do so by January 5, 2023. Otherwise, Plaintiff must submit the filing fee by January 5, 2023. Plaintiff is respectfully advised that, if he neither pays the filing fee nor obtains leave to proceed in forma pauperis, his case may be dismissed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Maria E. Garcia on 12/15/22. (Lefevre, Arthur) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Kathryn Pollack on behalf of Kilolo Kijakazi (Pollack, Kathryn) |
| Filing 7 Notice of New SSA Action: Electronic service of the complaint was made by the Clerk's Office upon the Social Security Office of General Counsel and the US Attorney's Office for the District of Connecticut. (Peterson, M) |
|
Filing 6
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 12/12/2022. (Peterson, M)
|
|
Filing 5
Standing Scheduling Order Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 12/12/2022. (Peterson, M)
|
|
Filing 4
Standing Order on Social Security Appeals Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 12/12/2022. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form) (Peterson, M)
|
| Answer deadline updated for Kilolo Kijakazi to 2/10/2023. (Peterson, M) |
| Judge Michael P. Shea and Judge Maria E. Garcia added. (Freberg, B) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Hector Rodriguez. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit)(Yelner, Olia) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Kilolo Kijakazi, filed by Hector Rodriguez.(Yelner, Olia) Modified on 12/13/2022 to correct party (Anastasio, F.). |
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.
