De La Cerda v. Astrue
| Arturo De La Cerda |
| Michael J. Astrue |
| Office of General Counsel Social Security Administration |
| 4:2010cv03252 |
| December 23, 2010 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| 4 Lincoln Office |
| Cheryl R. Zwart |
| Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 205 Denial Social Security Benefits |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
40
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 36 Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Attorney Fees. Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff $7,000.00 for attorney fees and $500.00 for expenses, for a total amount of $7,500.00. The defendant shall determine if the plaintiff owes a debt to the United States that is subject to offset. If there is no debt owed by plaintiff, the fee award shall be made payable to plaintiff's attorney. Shou ld there be an offsettable debt in an amount less than the EAJA award, then the amount of the EAJA award exceeding the offsettable debt shall be paid to plaintiff by a check made payable to plaintiff and sent to plaintiff in care of plaintiffs counsel at counsel's office of record. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (JAB)
|
|
Filing
34
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER regarding Complaint, 1 filed by Arturo De La Cerda. This matter is reversed and remanded for further proceeding in accordance with sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On remand the ALJ shall further develop the record in regard to whether a sufficient number of jobs exist in the national economy for an individual with De La Cerdas RFC, as defined by ALJ. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (JAB)
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER granting 19 Plaintiff's Motion to continue regarding ORDER setting briefing schedule 16 . Parties disagree on whether the filed administrative record is complete. If the dispute over the administrative record is not resolved by June 6, 2 011, the plaintiff shall present the issue to the court for resolution, with defendant having fourteen days thereafter to respond, and plaintiff having seven days to reply. If the parties resolve their dispute over the administrative record by June 6 , 2011: a. The plaintiff shall file his initial brief by July 6, 2001; b. The government shall file its responsive brief by August 5, 2011; and c. Any reply by the plaintiff shall be filed on or before August 19, 2011. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (JAB)
|
|
Filing
17
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - If the parties consent to final disposition of the case by the undersigned magistrate judge, on or before April 18, 2011, they shall complete the attached "CONSENT TO EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY A UNITED STATESMAGISTRATE J UDGE." After all parties have signed this form, e-mail it in.pdf format to consent@ned.uscourts.gov. Do not electronically file this form or submit it to chambers. In the absence of timely submitting the attached form in accordance with paragraph (1), the case will be reassigned to a district judge. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (GJG, )
|
|
Filing
6
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 2 Motion for Leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk shall send a copy of this Memorandum and Order together with 3 summons forms and 3 Form 285 to the plaintiff's attorney of record for service of process on the United States. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (Copies mailed as directed) (JSF)
|
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 Nebraska 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.
