Jeffery v. Saul
Plaintiff: Jeffery Calvin and Calvin Jeffery
Defendant: Andrew Saul
Alternative Dispute Resolution (Adr) Provider: Andrew M. Saul
Interested Party: Social Security Administration
Case Number: 1:2021cv06502
Filed: July 30, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Vernon S Broderick
Referring Judge: Barbara C Moses
Nature of Suit: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 416
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 16, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 24, 2021 Filing 10 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Daniella Marie Calenzo on behalf of Andrew Saul..(Calenzo, Daniella)
August 12, 2021 Filing 9 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE. Andrew Saul served on 8/12/2021, answer due 9/2/2021; Social Security Administration served on 8/12/2021, answer due 9/2/2021. Service was made by MAIL. Document filed by Calvin Jeffery..(Omoyosi, Omolola)
August 5, 2021 Filing 8 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to Andrew Saul..(pc)
August 5, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 7 SCHEDULING ORDER: The above-referenced social security action has been referred to Magistrate Judge Moses for Report and Recommendation. All motions and applications, including those related to scheduling, and all motions to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings, must be made to Judge Moses and in compliance with this Court's Individual Practices in Civil Cases, available on the Court's website at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-barbara-moses. Pursuant to Standing Order No. 16-MC-00171, dated April 20, 2016 (Standing Order), defendant shall file the electronic certified transcript of the administrative proceedings (e-CAR), which shall constitute the defendant's answer, no later than 90 days after defendant was served with process in this action. Thereafter, in order to promote the efficient adjudication of this matter, Judge Moses expects the parties to adhere to the following schedule and comply with the following procedures: 1.A paper courtesy copy of the e-CAR, marked as such, must be delivered to chambers by mail, overnight courier, or hand delivery promptly after filing. This requirement remains in effect notwithstanding the ongoing COVID-19pandemic. 2.No later than 30 days after the e-CAR is due, counsel for plaintiff must send a written proposal for settlement to counsel for the Commissioner, summarizing plaintiff's strongest arguments, with specific references to the portions of the record supporting those arguments, to determine if the case can be resolved. 3. Promptly upon receipt of plaintiff's settlement proposal, counsel for the Commissioner must consult with the agency, evaluate the merits of the proposal, and meet and confer with plaintiff's counsel in good faith, in person or by telephone, to determine whether the case can be resolved without further expenditure of attorney time and judicial resources. An exchange of emails is not sufficient. 4. No later than 30 days after plaintiff's settlement proposal is due, the parties shall either: a. electronically file a stipulation dismissing, remanding, or otherwise resolving the case; or b. electronically file a joint letter advising the Court that the parties have complied with the requirements of paragraph 2 and 3 above but were unable to resolve the case and are proceeding to brief their respective positions in accordance with paragraphs 5-7 below. 5. Plaintiff shall file his or her motion for judgment on the pleadings no later than 30 days after the parties' joint letter is due. The motion for judgment on the pleadings must contain, in appropriately titled portions of plaintiff's brief: a. a full description of the relevant facts, and b. a full description of the relevant administrative proceedings, both of which must be supported by citations to the supporting pages of the e-CAR. 6. The Commissioner shall file his response to the motion for judgment on the pleadings no later than 60 days after plaintiff's motion is due. The response must state, in appropriately titled portions of defendant's brief, whether the Commissioner agrees with plaintiff's descriptions of the relevant facts and the relevant administrative proceedings, and if not whether plaintiff's description misstates, mischaracterizes, or omits any material facts or proceedings. Additionally, the Commissioner must clearly identify the portion(s) of plaintiff's description with which he disagrees and cite to the pages of the e-CAR that support his position. Similarly, if the Commissioner agrees with plaintiff's description but wishes to direct the Court to additional facts in the record that he deems material, he must clearly identify those facts, explain why they are material to this Court's decision, and cite to the supporting pages of the e-CAR. 7. No later than 21 days after the Commissioner's response is due, plaintiff shall file any reply. The Court is familiar with the standard of review and the sequential evaluation process, so the parties should avoid boilerplate discussions of the governing legal standards. Rather, the parties should focus on applying relevant and controlling legal authority to the facts germane to each disputed issue. When citing relevant cases, statutes, regulations, Social Security Rulings, medical and vocational reference sources, or other legal authority to support their legal arguments, the parties shall provide complete and accurate citations to the portions of those authorities relied upon. The parties shall also specify the evidence upon which they rely to support their contentions, and provide accurate page citations to the Administrative Record for all evidence relied upon [i.e., "R. at ___"]. In addition, all medical terminology (including medical conditions, diagnoses, procedures, tests, anatomical references, and pharmaceuticals) shall be defined in terms understandable to a layperson, preferably by citation to a medical dictionary or other standard reference work. The parties may not supplement the record beyond the definition of technical terms. If the areas in which the parties agree or disagree are not sufficiently clear from their briefs, Judge Moses will schedule a conference, at which counsel will be expected to assist the Court in determining what issues are genuinely in dispute between them and answer any questions the Court may have concerning the case. The parties are reminded that, under the Standing Order, memoranda filed in support of or in opposition to any dispositive motion shall not exceed 25 pages, and reply memoranda shall not exceed 10 pages. Any party seeking to exceed these page limitations must apply to Judge Moses for leave to do so, with copies to all counsel, no later than seven days before the date upon which the memorandum must be filed and otherwise in compliance with Judge Moses's Individual Practices in Civil Cases. Memoranda exceeding 10 pages must include a table of contents and a table of authorities, neither of which shall count against the page limit. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses on 8/5/2021) (ate)
August 4, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER OF REFERENCE. Order that case be referred to the Clerk of Court for assignment to a Magistrate Judge for Social Security. Referred to Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses. (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 8/4/2021) (kv)
August 4, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER GRANTING IFP APPLICATION: Leave to proceed in this Court without prepayment of fees is authorized. 28 U.S.C. 1915. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 8/4/2021) (kv)
August 2, 2021 Filing 4 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(Omoyosi, Omolola)
August 2, 2021 Case Designated ECF. (sj)
August 2, 2021 Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (sj)
August 2, 2021 ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING PARTY MODIFICATION. Notice to attorney Omolola Omoyosi. The party information for the following party/parties has been modified: Calvin Jeffery, Andrew Saul. The information for the party/parties has been modified for the following reason/reasons: party name contained a typographical error; party role was entered incorrectly; party text was omitted. (sj)
August 2, 2021 ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING CIVIL. CASE OPENING STATISTICAL ERROR CORRECTION: Notice to attorney Omolola Omoyosi. The following case opening statistical information was erroneously selected/entered: County code Albany. The following correction(s) have been made to your case entry: the County code has been modified to Bronx. (sj)
August 2, 2021 ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY TO ELECTRONICALLY FILE CIVIL COVER SHEET. Notice to Attorney Omolola Omoyosi. Attorney must electronically file the Civil Cover Sheet. Use the event type Civil Cover Sheet found under the event list Other Documents. (sj)
August 2, 2021 CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge Vernon S. Broderick. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/district-judges. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/rules/ecf-related-instructions..(sj)
July 30, 2021 Filing 3 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Andrew Saul, re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Jeffery Calvin..(Omoyosi, Omolola)
July 30, 2021 Filing 2 REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS. Document filed by Jeffery Calvin..(Omoyosi, Omolola)
July 30, 2021 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Andrew M. Saul. Document filed by Jeffery Calvin. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibits B-C, #3 Exhibit Exhibits D-E, #4 Application to proceed without fees/costs).(Omoyosi, Omolola)

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: Jeffery v. Saul
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jeffery Calvin
Represented By: Omolola Omoyosi
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: Calvin Jeffery
Represented By: Omolola Omoyosi
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 ]
Alternative dispute resolution (adr) provider: Andrew M. Saul
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: Andrew Saul
Represented By: Daniella Marie Calenzo
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 ]
Interested party: Social Security Administration
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?