BORGSTROM v. ASTRUE
Plaintiff: TIM BORGSTROM
Defendant: MICHAEL ASTRUE
Case Number: 3:2009cv00510
Filed: November 13, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Florida
Office: Pensacola Office
County: Okaloosa
Presiding Judge: LACEY A COLLIER
Presiding Judge: MILES DAVIS
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
November 3, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 23 ORDER ADOPTING 21 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED, this action is DISMISSED, and the clerk is directed to close the file. Signed by SENIOR JUDGE LACEY A COLLIER on 11/3/2010. (laj)
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 Florida Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: BORGSTROM v. ASTRUE
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: TIM BORGSTROM
Represented By: MICHAEL VINCENT MCGRAIL
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: MICHAEL ASTRUE
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 [ Unicourt | 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?