Rodriguez v. Colvin
Plaintiff: Duvelza Esperanza Rodriguez
Defendant: Carolyn W. Colvin
Case Number: 5:2016cv00053
Filed: February 23, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Office: Laredo Office
County: Anderson
Presiding Judge: Marina Garcia Marmolejo
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 205
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
September 29, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 24 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER- This Court AFFIRMS the Commissioners decision and DISMISSES with prejudice Plaintiffs Complaint. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Diana Song Quiroga) Parties notified.(gsalinas, 5)
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 Texas Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Rodriguez v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Duvelza Esperanza Rodriguez
Represented By: Jacqueline F Nel
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: Carolyn W. Colvin
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?