Miller v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Richard Donald Miller
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 0:2012cv02545
Filed: October 4, 2012
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
County: Hennepin
Presiding Judge: David S. Doty
Presiding Judge: Jeffrey J. Keyes
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
March 28, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 35 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Adopting 28 Report and Recommendation; Denying Plaintiff's 21 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Richard Donald Miller; Granting Defendant's 25 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Carolyn W. Colvin (Written Opinion). Signed by Senior Judge David S. Doty on 3/28/2014. (PJM)
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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Miller 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: Richard Donald Miller
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 J. Astrue
Represented By: David W Fuller
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?