Hoover v. Commissioner of Social Security
Plaintiff: Rhonda K. Hoover
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security
Case Number: 2:2021cv05888
Filed: December 22, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Presiding Judge: James L Graham
Referring Judge: Kimberly A Jolson
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 205
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 29, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
February 15, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 7 First CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed by Defendant Statement of Errors due by 4/1/2022. (Attachments: #1 Court Transcript, #2 Documents Related to Administrative Process, #3 Payment Documents and Decisions, #4 Jurisdictional Documents and Notices, #5 Non Disability Related Developments, #6 Disability Related Developments, #7 Medical Records Part 1, #8 Medical Records Part 2) (Stark, John)
January 14, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Adam R. Sorkin for Defendant Commissioner of Social Security (Sorkin, Adam)
January 11, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 4 COMPLAINT against Commissioner of Social Security filed by Rhonda K. Hoover (kk2)
January 11, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER granting #1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Certified administrative record due sixty (60) days after filing of the Complaint and SS Identification Form; Plaintiff's statement of errors due forty-five (45) days after filing of the administrative record; Defendant;s response in opposition due forty-five (45) days after service of the Statement of Errors; Plaintiff may reply fifteen (15) days thereafter. The parties should execute and file the attached Notice and Consent form within thirty (30) days after the administrative record is filed if they consent to disposition of this case by the Magistrate Judge. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson on 1/11/2022. (Attachments: #1 Notice and Consent Form) (kk2)
January 11, 2022 Opinion or Order Set/Reset Deadlines: Commissioner of Social Security answer due 3/14/2022 (kk2)
December 30, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER re #1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis: The Court is unable to determine how Plaintiff supports herself from its review of the current Motion. Plaintiff is ORDERED to submit a revised Motion on or before 1/18/2022. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson on 12/30/2021. (kk2)
December 22, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Plaintiff Rhonda K. Hoover. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Complaint, #3 SS ID Form) (Dixon, Jay)

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

Search for this case: Hoover v. Commissioner of Social Security
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Rhonda K. Hoover
Represented By: Jay W Dixon
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: Adam R. Sorkin
Represented By: John J. Stark
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?