Hooker v. Commissioner of Social Security
| Natalie Hooker |
| Commissioner of Social Security |
| 5:2024cv00101 |
| May 24, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky |
| Lanny King |
| Social Security: SSID Tit. XIV |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 31, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Lanny King on 5/31/2024 granting #6 Motion for Bryan Konoski to Appear Pro Hac Vice. cc: Counsel(MNM)
|
| Filing 9 Notice of Social Security Case Assignment re #1 Complaint. Social Security Notice due by 6/20/2024. (MNM) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE OF SERVICE: Pursuant to Rule 3 of the Supplemental Rules for Social Security Actions under 42 U.S.C. 405(g) and #General Order 2023-2:, the Court hereby notifies the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration and the United States Attorney's Office for the Western District of Kentucky that a Complaint seeking judicial review has been filed. This Notice of Electronic Filing is the official notification referenced in Rule 3 of the Supplemental Rules for Social Security Actions. The plaintiff does not need to serve separately a summons and complaint under Civil Rule 4. This Notice of Electronic Filing is the Official Entry. No Document is attached. (MNM) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Lanny King on 5/29/2024 granting #4 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. cc: Counsel(MNM)
|
| Filing 6 MOTION for Bryan Konoski to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number AKYWDC-4039640. by Plaintiff Natalie Hooker (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order, #2 Certificate of Good Standing) (Konoski, Bryan) |
| Filing 5 ATTORNEY NOTICE of Deficiency to Bryan M. Konoski re #1 Complaint.Reason for Deficiency: motion to appear pro hac vice. Failure to comply will be brought to the attention of the Court. Response due by 6/7/2024. (KJA) |
| Filing 4 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Plaintiff Natalie Hooker. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (HMC) |
| Filing 3 Corporate Disclosure Statement (pursuant to Rule 7.1(a)(1)) by Natalie Hooker. (HMC) |
| Filing 2 Case Assignment (Random Selection): Case Assigned to Magistrate Judge Lanny King. (HMC) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Natalie Hooker against Commissioner of Social Security. (Attachments: #1 Cover Sheet) (HMC) |
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 Kentucky Western 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
| Search for this case: Hooker v. Commissioner of Social Security | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Natalie Hooker | |
| Represented By: | Bryan M. Konoski |
| 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: Commissioner of Social Security | |
| Represented By: | Timothy D. Thompson |
| Represented By: | Benjamin Seth Schecter |
| 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.
