Rodriguez v. Kijakazi
| Adam D. Rodriguez |
| Commissioner Kilolo Kijakazi and Kilolo Kijakazi |
| 1:2022cv02567 |
| May 16, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Franklin U Valderrama |
| Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1383 Review of HHS Decision |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 5, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Plaintiff's application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis #4 is granted and payment of the filing fee is waived. Mailed notice (axc).
|
|
Filing 8
STATUS Report Joint Status Report by Adam D. Rodriguez (Marvin, Cody)
|
|
Filing 7
CERTIFIED COPY OF ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD by Defendant Kilolo Kijakazi (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit)(Flannery, Kathleen)
|
|
Filing 6
DESIGNATION of Kathleen Marie Flannery as U.S. Attorney for Defendant Kilolo Kijakazi (Flannery, Kathleen)
|
|
Filing 5
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Plaintiff's brief in support of reversing or remanding the decision subject to review is due within 60 days of the filing of the administrative record (no motion required). The Social Security Administration's motion to affirm the decision subject to review and its brief in support are due 45 days after plaintiff's brief is filed. Plaintiff's reply brief, if any, is due 14 days after defendant's brief is filed. No oversized briefs will be allowed without prior court approval obtained at least one week before the due date and upon good cause shown. Additionally, on or before the deadline for the filing of the administrative record, the parties shall file a joint status report in which they indicate (i) whether the parties will agree to consent to the exercise of jurisdiction by a United States Magistrate Judge and (ii) whether they will agree to a voluntary remand to the Commissioner. If the parties consent to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge, they shall execute and file with the Court the joint consent form included as part of the Clerk's Notice previously filed in this case. If the parties agree to a voluntary remand to the Commissioner, they must file an agreed motion for remand. Mailed notice (axc).
|
|
Filing 4
APPLICATION by Plaintiff Adam D. Rodriguez for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Marvin, Cody)
|
|
Filing 3
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Adam D. Rodriguez by Cody Thomas Marvin (Marvin, Cody)
|
|
Filing 2
CIVIL Cover Sheet (Marvin, Cody)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT filed by Adam D. Rodriguez; (Attachments: #1 AC decision)(Marvin, Cody)
|
|
CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (dxb, )
|
|
CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey Cole. Case assignment: Random assignment. (dxb, )
|
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 Illinois Northern 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.
