Ramos v. Commissioner of Social Security et al
Plaintiff: Edwin Ramos
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security
Case Number: 5:2021cv00759
Filed: July 2, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Frederick J Scullin
Referring Judge: Daniel J Stewart
Nature of Suit: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 3, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 3, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 8 TEXT ORDER: The Court has considered Plaintiff's #3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis in this matter under 28 USC 1915. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED. SO ORDERED by Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Stewart on 8/3/2021. (mab)
July 12, 2021 Filing 7 TEXT ORDER REASSIGNING CASE to Senior Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr and Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Stewart for all further proceedings. Parties have not consented. Authorized by the Chief Judge pursuant to General Order #18. (mgh)
July 9, 2021 Filing 6 SOCIAL SECURITY CONSENT / DECLINATION FORM filed by Edwin Ramos advising of declination of consent to Jurisdiction by US Magistrate Judge. (Olinsky, Howard)
July 7, 2021 Filing 5 NOTICE OF ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Christopher Lewis Potter appearing for Commissioner of Social Security . Social Security Administrative Transcript due by 10/5/2021. (Potter, Christopher)
July 2, 2021 Filing 4 Social Security Appeal Case Assignment Form and General Order #18 Issued. Pursuant to General Order #18, in the event the Plaintiff does not timely consent, or if the United States timely withdraws its consent, the case will be reassigned to a District Judge consistent with General Order #12. Social Security Consent/Declination Form due by 7/23/2021. (gmd)
July 2, 2021 Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Edwin Ramos (gmd)
July 2, 2021 Filing 2 Social Security Identification Form [LODGED] [Pursuant to General Order #18, this document has been electronically lodged with the Court. Viewable by case participants and court personnel only, it is not a filed document, therefore is not available for public inspection. Any further distribution or dissemination is prohibited]. (gmd)
July 2, 2021 Filing 1 COMPLAINT WITH EXHIBIT A - Social Security Appeal. [Pursuant to General Order #18, Section B(3), the CM/ECF system will generate a Notice of Electronic Filing to the USAO-NDNY and Regional Counsel for the Social Security Administration. Service of a Complaint along with the Social Security Identification Form under the Pilot Program will be considered complete only when the three steps in paragraph 3(A), 3(B) and 3(C) of General Order #18 have been completed.]. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(gmd)

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 New York Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ramos v. Commissioner of Social Security et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security
Represented By: Christopher Lewis Potter
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: Edwin Ramos
Represented By: Howard D. Olinsky
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?