VALEZ v. ASTRUE
Plaintiff: SHANNON VALEZ
Defendant: MICHAEL ASTRUE
Case Number: 2:2010cv02681
Filed: June 4, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Office: Philadelphia Office
County: Philadelphia
Presiding Judge: PETRESE B. TUCKER
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405
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
April 4, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER THAT REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION DATED 2/3/11 IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED. THE PLAINTIFFS REQUEST FOR REVIEW IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. MATTER SHALL BE REMANDED FOR AN OPINION BY A MEDICAL EXPERT, ETC. CASE SHALL BE MARKED AS REMANDED.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE PETRESE B. TUCKER ON 3/31/11. 4/4/11 ENTERED AND COPIES EMAILED.(rf, )
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 Pennsylvania Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: VALEZ v. ASTRUE
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: SHANNON VALEZ
Represented By: THOMAS N. SHERIDAN
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: MICHAEL ASTRUE
Represented By: EDA GIUSTI
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?