Burger v. Astrue

Plaintiff: Todd Burger
Defendant: Michael J Astrue
Case Number: 5:2013cv00062
Filed: January 18, 2013
Court: Oklahoma Western District Court
Office: Oklahoma City Office
County: Garfield
Presiding Judge: Stephen P. Friot
Referring Judge: Suzanne Mitchell
Nature of Suit: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
February 6, 2014 16 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER ADOPTING 15 Report and Recommendation. Dft's final decision is REVERSED & this matter is REMANDED for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 USC § 405(g). Signed by Honorable Stephen P. Friot on 2/6/14. (llg)

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 Oklahoma Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Burger v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Todd Burger
Represented By: Miles L Mitzner
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Michael J Astrue
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 [ 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.