Howard v. Social Security Commissioner
| Roderick Howard |
| Social Security Commissioner |
| Social Security Administration |
| 1:2022cv00250 |
| June 27, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Rhode Island |
| Lincoln D Almond |
| William E Smith |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 17, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 SOCIAL SECURITY CASE OPENING NOTICE ISSUED.The defendant shall have up to and including 10/3/2022 to enter an appearance and either file a dispositive motion or the Certified Administrative Record which shall be deemed an answer (general denial) to the plaintiff's complaint as outlined in Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(b)(3). (Simoncelli, Michael) |
TEXT ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis.. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Lincoln D. Almond on 6/29/2022. (Noel, Jeannine)
|
| MOTIONS REFERRED: #2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis and #1 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS referred for Report and Recommendation to Lincoln D. Almond. (Urizandi, Nissheneyra) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Roderick Howard. (DaCruz, Kayla) |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS, filed by Roderick Howard. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(DaCruz, Kayla) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
