Riendeau v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Roswitha Riendeau
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 1:2009cv00149
Filed: April 1, 2009
Court: US District Court for the District of Rhode Island
Office: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW Office
County: Providence
Presiding Judge: Mary M Lisi
Presiding Judge: David L. Martin
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Jury Demanded By: 42:1383 Review of HHS Decision

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
April 13, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 13 Report and Recommendations recommending that defendant's motion to affirm be granted - So Ordered by Chief Judge Mary M Lisi on 4/13/10. (Barletta, Barbara)
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 Rhode Island District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Riendeau 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: Roswitha Riendeau
Represented By: Tanya J. Garrian
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?