Mabry v. Saul
Darshel Wayne Mabry |
Andrew M. Saul and Andrew Saul |
1:2019cv00255 |
August 29, 2019 |
US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina |
Kenneth D Bell |
David Keesler |
Social Security: DIWC/DIWW |
42 U.S.C. ยง 206 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on December 9, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 3 AFFIDAVIT of Service filed by Darshel Wayne Mabry. Andrew Saul served on 9/20/2019, answer due 11/19/2019. (Attachment: #1 Return Receipt Cards)(Stepp, Christopher) Modified service and answer dates on 10/16/2019. NEF Regenerated. (maf) |
TEXT-ONLY Order of Referral - Social Security. Pursuant to the Standing Order 3:13MC95, 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 72.1 this case is referred to a United States Magistrate Judge to make findings of fact, conclusions of law and to recommend disposition of any dispositive motion filed through submission of a Memorandum and Recommendation to the District Judge. Case referred to Magistrate Judge David Keesler (nvc) |
Filing 2 Summons Issued Electronically as to Andrew M. Saul, US Attorney and US Attorney General. NOTICE: Counsel shall print the summons and serve with other case opening documents in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P.4. (ni) |
Case assigned to District Judge Kenneth D. Bell. This is your only notice - you will not receive a separate document. (ni) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Andrew M. Saul ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0419-4157510), filed by Darshel Wayne Mabry.(Stepp, Christopher) |
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.
- 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.