HENDERSON v. ASTRUE

HENDERSON v. ASTRUE

Plaintiff:	JOANNE HENDERSON
Defendant:	MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
Case Number:	2:2012cv05316
Filed:	September 17, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Office:	Philadelphia Office
County:	Philadelphia
Presiding Judge:	JAMES KNOLL GARDNER
Nature of Suit:	Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
October 27, 2014	Filing 20 ORDER THAT MAGISTRATE JUDGE STRAWBRIDGE'S REPOR TAND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR REVIEW IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR AN AWARD OF BENEFITS IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PLAINTIFF'S ALTERNATIVE REQUEST FOR REMAND IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF JOANNE HENDERSON AND AGAINST DEFENDANT CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF TH E SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER DATED MAY 24, 2014 WHICH DENIED BENEFITS TO PLAINTIFF VERONICA PAUL IS VACATED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. SECTION 40 5(g) THIS MATTER IS REMANDED TO THE ACTING COMMISSIONER FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MAGISTRATE JUDGE STRAWBRIDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL CLOSE THIS CASE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JAMES KNOLL GARDNER ON 10/24/2014. 10/27/2014 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(lbs, )

Date Filed

Document Text

October 27, 2014

Filing 20 ORDER THAT MAGISTRATE JUDGE STRAWBRIDGE'S REPOR TAND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR REVIEW IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR AN AWARD OF BENEFITS IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PLAINTIFF'S ALTERNATIVE REQUEST FOR REMAND IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF JOANNE HENDERSON AND AGAINST DEFENDANT CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF TH E SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER DATED MAY 24, 2014 WHICH DENIED BENEFITS TO PLAINTIFF VERONICA PAUL IS VACATED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. SECTION 40 5(g) THIS MATTER IS REMANDED TO THE ACTING COMMISSIONER FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MAGISTRATE JUDGE STRAWBRIDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL CLOSE THIS CASE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JAMES KNOLL GARDNER ON 10/24/2014. 10/27/2014 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(lbs, )

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: HENDERSON 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: JOANNE HENDERSON
Represented By:	ROBERT SAVOY
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 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	[ 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?