Marces-Chavela v. Commissioner Social Security Administration
| Susan Marces-Chavela |
| Commissioner Social Security Administration |
| 3:2018cv02047 |
| November 26, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Michael W Mosman |
| Social Security: DIWC/DIWW |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 205 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 16, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 Clerk's Notice of Mailing to Susan Marcos-Chavela regarding Order to Show Cause, #8 . (dls) |
Filing 8
Order to Show Cause. Therefore, per Local Rule 41-2(a), within ten (10) days from the date of this order Plaintiff must file either an amended complaint or a memorandum describing why this case should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. If Plaintiff does not comply with this order, the above-captioned cases will be dismissed. Signed on 1/16/19 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)
|
| Filing 7 Response to Order 5 . Filed by Susan Marces-Chavela. (sss) |
| Filing 6 Clerk's Notice of Mailing to Susan Marcos-Chavela regarding Order on motion/application for leave to proceed ifp 4 and Scheduling 5 . (dls) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER: Because portions of the Complaint #1 are illegible, Plaintiff is ordered to file an amended complaint within 30 days of this order. Plaintiff shall ensure that any amended complaint complies with the legibility requirements of Local Rule 10-1. Ordered by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER: DENYING Plaintiff's Application for Leave to Proceed IFP #2 with leave to amend. Plaintiff may resubmit the Application for Leave to Proceed IFP within 30 days of this order, but must sign and date the declaration affirming that all information is true and correct. If resubmitting an application, Plaintiff is also directed to complete all sections of the application legibly, in accordance with Local Rule 10-1. The Clerk of Court shall provide Plaintiff with a copy of the Application for Leave to Proceed IFP. Ordered by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)
|
|
Filing 3
Social Security Procedural Order and Notice of Case Assignment to Judge Michael W. Mosman. Ordered by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (Mailed to plaintiff date of entry of Order 11/28/2018.) (sss)
|
| Filing 2 Complaint to Review Final Decision of Commissioner. Filed by Susan Marces-Chavela against Commissioner Social Security Administration. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet). (sss) |
| Filing 1 Application for Leave to Proceed IFP. Filed by Susan Marces-Chavela. (sss) |
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 Oregon District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Marces-Chavela v. Commissioner Social Security Administration | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Commissioner Social Security Administration | |
| Represented By: | Renata Gowie |
| 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: Susan Marces-Chavela | |
| 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.
