Miller v. Saul

Plaintiff: Heather Miller
Defendant: Andrew M. Saul
Interested Party: SSA Office of General Counsel
Case Number: 4:2019cv01693
Filed: June 13, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Presiding Judge: David D Noce
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42:205
Jury Demanded By: None

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on June 19, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
June 19, 2019 Filing 10 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Heather Miller. Defendant Andrew M. Saul served on 6/18/2019, answer due 8/19/2019. (KKS)
June 19, 2019 Filing 9 FULL CONSENT has been received by Plaintiff Heather Miller, Defendant Andrew M. Saul. (KKS)
June 19, 2019 Filing 8 ENTRY of Appearance by Nicholas P. Llewellyn for Defendant Andrew M. Saul. (Llewellyn, Nicholas)
June 14, 2019 Filing 7 Summons Issued as to defendant Andrew M. Saul, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General. The summons was hand delivered to USMS. (JAB)
June 14, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [#2 ] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall issue process or cause process to issue on the complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge David D. Noce on 6/14/19. (JAB)
June 14, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 5 CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the following provisions apply in this case, and will be modified only upon a showing of exceptional circumstances: This case is assigned to Track: 4. (SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS). Signed by Magistrate Judge David D. Noce on 6/14/19. (JAB)
June 13, 2019 Filing 4 Pursuant to Local Rule 2.08, the assigned/referred magistrate judge is designated and authorized by the court to exercise full authority in this assigned/referred action or matter under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636 and 18 U.S.C Sec. 3401, including any case budgeting matters. (CSAW)
June 13, 2019 Case Opening Notification: All parties must file the Notice Regarding Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form consenting to or opting out of the Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. Click #here for the instructions. Judge Assigned: Honorable David D. Noce. (MFG)
June 13, 2019 Filing 3 FINANCIAL AFFIDAVIT - CJA 23 by Plaintiff Heather Miller. (Camp, David)
June 13, 2019 Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Plaintiff Heather Miller. (Camp, David)
June 13, 2019 Filing 1 Social Security COMPLAINT Non-Jury Demand,Yes or No - Yes,, filed by Heather Miller. (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Original Filing Form)(Camp, David)

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 Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Miller v. Saul
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Interested party: SSA Office of General Counsel
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Heather Miller
Represented By: David D. Camp
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Andrew M. Saul
Represented By: Nicholas P. Llewellyn
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 [ 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?