Bowers v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Dietra Bowers
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 4:2011cv40229
Filed: December 2, 2011
Court: US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Office: Worcester Office
County: Worcester
Presiding Judge: F. Dennis Saylor
Nature of Suit: Disability Insurance
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 205
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
July 14, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 25 District Judge Timothy S Hillman: ORDER entered denying 11 Motion to Remand to Social Security Administration; granting 16 Motion for Order Affirming Decision of Commissioner; adopting Report and Recommendations re 22 Report and Recommendations. (Jones, Sherry)
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 Massachusetts District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Bowers v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Michael J. 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 ]
Plaintiff: Dietra Bowers
Represented By: Ronald B. Eskin
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?