Sampson v. Saul
Plaintiff: Justin Alan Sampson
Defendant: Andrew M. Saul
Case Number: 1:2020cv00309
Filed: October 30, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina
Presiding Judge: W Carleton Metcalf
Referring Judge: Martin Reidinger
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on February 3, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 27, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER granting #7 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer re #1 Complaint. Andrew M. Saul Answer and the Administrative Record due 3/5/2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge W. Carleton Metcalf on 12/23/2020. (hms)
December 23, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 7 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to Answer re: #1 Complaint by Andrew M. Saul. (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Proposed Order) (Russell, Mary Ellen). Motions referred to W. Carleton Metcalf.
December 23, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Mary Ellen Russell on behalf of Andrew M. Saul (Russell, Mary Ellen)
December 7, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 5 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Justin Alan Sampson. Andrew M. Saul served on 11/5/2020, answer due 1/4/2021. (thh)
November 4, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 4 Summons Issued Electronically to US Marshal for service as to Andrew M. Saul, US Attorney and US Attorney General. (Attachments: #1 USM 285 Forms) (hms)
November 3, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Chief Judge Martin Reidinger on 11/03/2020. (hms)
November 2, 2020 Opinion or Order 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 W. Carleton Metcalf. Entered by Chief Judge Martin Reidinger on 11/2/2020. (khm) Motions referred to W. Carleton Metcalf.
October 30, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 2 MOTION (Sealed - Participants) to Proceed in forma pauperis by Justin Alan Sampson. (Bowling, Russell)
October 30, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Andrew M. Saul, filed by Justin Alan Sampson. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Bowling, Russell) (Main Document 1 replaced on 10/30/2020) (hms). (Additional attachment(s) added on 10/30/2020: #2 Exhibit) (hms).
October 30, 2020 Opinion or Order Case assigned to Chief Judge Martin Reidinger. This is your only notice - you will not receive a separate document. (hms)

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 North Carolina Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Sampson v. Saul
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Andrew M. Saul
Represented By: Mary Ellen Russell
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: Justin Alan Sampson
Represented By: Russell R. Bowling
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?