COMBS v. BERRYHILL
COMBS and EARNESTINE D. COMBS |
COLVIN and NANCY A. BERRYHILL |
1:2016cv02386 |
September 6, 2016 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
Indianapolis Office |
Tim A Baker |
Jane Magnus-Stinson |
Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI |
42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID) |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on June 26, 2017. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 26 FINAL JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. PRO. 58 - Having this day issued its Entry Reviewing the Commissioner's Decision, the Court now AFFIRMS the Commissioner's decision and enters FINAL JUDGMENT against Plaintiff Earnestine Combs and in favor of Defendant, such that Ms. Combs shall take nothing by way of her Complaint. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 6/26/2017.(APD) |
Filing 25 ENTRY REVIEWING THE COMMISSIONER'S DECISION - Plaintiff Earnestine Combs applied for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income from the Social Security Administration ("SSA") on May 20, 2013, alleging an onset date of March 29, 2013. [Filing No. #14 -6 at 9-14.] Her applications were initially denied on July 5, 2013, [Filing No. #14 -4 at 4-21], and upon reconsideration on August 21, 2013, [Filing No. #14 -4 at 22-35]. Administrative Law Judge Hortensia Haaversen (the "ALJ") held a hearing on January 22, 2015, [Filing No. #14 -2 at 43-59], and issued a decision on April 6, 2015, concluding that Ms. Combs was not entitled to receive disability insurance benefits or supplemental security income, [Filing No. #14 -2 at 23-42]. The Appeals Council denied review on August 18, 2016. [Filing No. #14 -2 at 2-7.] On September 6, 2016, Ms. Combs timely filed this civil action, asking the Court to review the denial of benefits pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405 (g) and 42 U.S.C. 1383(c). [Filing No. #1 .] Ms. Combs also filed a Motion to Strike, [Filing No. #23 ], which the Court will consider herein. For the reasons stated in this Entry, Ms. Combs' Motion to Strike, [Filing No. #23 ], is GRANTED. As such, the Court did not consider the 2013 Transcript in its decision herein and disregarded all references to the document in the party's respective briefs. However, "[t]he standard for disability claims under the Social Security Act is stringent." Williams-Overstreet v. Astrue, 364 F. App'x 271, 274 (7th Cir. 2010). "Even claimants with substantial impairments are not necessarily entitled to benefits, which are paid for by taxes, including taxes paid by those who work despite serious physical or mental impairments and for whom working is difficult and painful." Id. at 274. Taken together, the Court can find no legal basis presented by Ms. Combs to reverse the ALJ's decision that she was not disabled during the relevant time period. Therefore, the decision below is AFFIRMED. Final judgment shall issue accordingly. (See Entry). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 6/26/2017. (APD) |
Filing 24 BRIEF/MEMORANDUM in Support re #23 MOTION to Strike References to 02/11/2013 Hearing Transcript , filed by Plaintiff EARNESTINE D. COMBS. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Douglas (S.D. Ind.), #2 Exhibit B - Belcher (S.D. Ind.))(Hanley, J.) |
Filing 23 MOTION to Strike References to 02/11/2013 Hearing Transcript, filed by Plaintiff EARNESTINE D. COMBS. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Granting Plaintiffs Motion to Strike)(Hanley, J.) |
Filing 22 Brief Reply by EARNESTINE D. COMBS. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A- Douglas (S.D. Ind.) Decision)(Hanley, J.) |
Filing 21 Brief Def's Memorandum in Support of Commissioner's Decision by NANCY A. BERRYHILL. (Olivier, Kathryn) |
Filing 20 ORDER granting #19 Motion for Extension of Time to Serve a Response to Plaintiff's Brief to 3/21/2017. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 2/17/2017. (JRB) |
Filing 19 Second MOTION for Extension of Time to March 21, 2017 , filed by Defendant NANCY A. BERRYHILL. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Counsel, #2 Text of Proposed Order)(Olivier, Kathryn) |
Filing 18 ORDER granting #17 Motion for Extension of Time to 2/21/2017 to Serve Response to Plaintiff's Brief. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 1/25/2017. (JRB) |
Filing 17 First MOTION for Extension of Time to February 21, 2017 , filed by Defendant CAROLYN W. COLVIN. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Counsel, #2 Text of Proposed Order)(Olivier, Kathryn) |
Filing 16 Brief by EARNESTINE D. COMBS. (Hanley, J.) |
Filing 15 ORDER - Plaintiff shall file a brief in support of the complaint within twenty-eight (28) days of the date of this Order. Defendant shall submit a brief in opposition within twenty-eight (28) days after service of plaintiff's brief. Plaintiff shall then have fourteen (14) days to file any reply brief. A failure to file a timely brief may result in a summary ruling at the close of the briefing period. (See Order.) Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 11/28/2016. (GSO) |
Filing 14 TRANSCRIPT of Administrative Record of Social Security Administration, by CAROLYN W. COLVIN. (Attachments: #1 002 Ct Transcript Index, #2 003 Docs Rel to Admn Proc pgs. 1-95, #3 004 Pymt Docs and Decis pgs. 96-159, #4 005 Juris Docs and Not Pt1 pgs. 160-244, #5 006 Juris Docs and Not Pt2 pgs. 245-305, #6 007 Non-Dis Rel Dev pgs. 306-331, #7 008 Dis Rel Dev pgs. 332-416, #8 009 MR Pt1 pgs. 417-491, #9 010 MR Pt2 pgs. 492-544, #10 011 MR Pt3 pgs. 545-640, #11 012 MR Pt4 pgs. 641-709)(Olivier, Kathryn) |
Filing 13 ANSWER to #1 Complaint , filed by CAROLYN W. COLVIN.(Olivier, Kathryn) |
Filing 12 NOTICE of Appearance by Kathryn E. Olivier on behalf of Defendant CAROLYN W. COLVIN. (Olivier, Kathryn) |
Filing 11 RETURN of USM Service, sent on behalf of Plaintiff EARNESTINE D. COMBS. Defendant CAROLYN W. COLVIN (c/o General Chief Counsel) served on 9/29/2016. (GSO) |
Filing 10 RETURN of USM Service, sent on behalf of Plaintiff EARNESTINE D. COMBS. Defendant CAROLYN W. COLVIN (c/o Office of the United States Attorney) served on 9/23/2016. (GSO) |
Filing 9 RETURN of USM Service, sent on behalf of Plaintiff EARNESTINE D. COMBS. Defendant CAROLYN W. COLVIN (c/o United States Attorney General) served on 9/26/2016. (GSO) |
Filing 8 RETURN of USM Service, sent on behalf of Plaintiff EARNESTINE D. COMBS. Defendant CAROLYN W. COLVIN (c/o Office of the United States Attorney) served on 9/23/2016. (GSO) |
Filing 7 Documents for service by USM - #1 Complaint, #5 Entry Directing Further Proceedings, and #6 Summons. Paper copies to USM. (GSO) |
Filing 6 Summons Issued as to Defendant CAROLYN W. COLVIN. (Attachments: #1 USM 285 Forms) (GSO) |
Filing 5 ENTRY Directing Further Proceedings - The plaintiff's #3 request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The clerk is directed to issue summons to the defendant and to other officials designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(2). The Marshal for this District is directed to serve the summons and complaint, with a copy of this Entry, at the expense of the United States. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 9/8/2016. Copies distributed pursuant to distribution list. (GSO) |
Filing 4 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (DJH) |
Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Plaintiff EARNESTINE D COMBS. (Attachments: #1 payment record, #2 Envelope)(DJH) |
Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by J. Frank Hanley, II on behalf of Plaintiff EARNESTINE D COMBS. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (DJH) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against CAROLYN W. COLVIN, filed by EARNESTINE D COMBS. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons, #3 Civil Cover Sheet, #4 Envelope)(DJH) |
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 Indiana Southern 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.