Suarez v. Commissioner of Social Security et al

Justia Dockets & Filings Second Circuit New York Southern District Suarez v. Commissioner of Social Security et al

Suarez v. Commissioner of Social Security et al

Plaintiff:	Dalgena Suarez
Defendant:	Commissioner of Social Security
Case Number:	1:2016cv02073
Filed:	March 17, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	Bronx
Presiding Judge:	Kevin Nathaniel Fox
Presiding Judge:	Edgardo Ramos
Nature of Suit:	Disability Insurance
Cause of Action:	26 U.S.C. § 7405
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
April 5, 2017	Filing 15 OPINION AND ORDER adopting 14 Report and Recommendation re: 8 MOTION to Dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment filed by Commissioner of Social Security. The Court has carefully reviewed Judge Fox's th orough and well-reasoned Report and finds no error, clear or otherwise. Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report in its entirety. The Commissioner's motion to dismiss is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate th e motion, Doc. 8, to mail a copy of this Opinion and Order to Plaintiff, and to close the case. Furthermore, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Opinion and Order would not be taken in good faith; therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for purposes of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). (As further set forth in this Opinion and Order.) (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 4/4/2017) (mro)

Date Filed

Document Text

April 5, 2017

Filing 15 OPINION AND ORDER adopting 14 Report and Recommendation re: 8 MOTION to Dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment filed by Commissioner of Social Security. The Court has carefully reviewed Judge Fox's th orough and well-reasoned Report and finds no error, clear or otherwise. Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report in its entirety. The Commissioner's motion to dismiss is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate th e motion, Doc. 8, to mail a copy of this Opinion and Order to Plaintiff, and to close the case. Furthermore, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Opinion and Order would not be taken in good faith; therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for purposes of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). (As further set forth in this Opinion and Order.) (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 4/4/2017) (mro)

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Suarez 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 ]
Plaintiff: Dalgena Suarez
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: Commissioner of Social Security
Represented By:	Joseph Anthony Pantoja
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?