Roxanne Olivan Rosales v. Andrew Saul
| 5:2020cv00543 |
| May 5, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Texas |
| San Antonio Office |
| Social Security: DIWC/DIWW |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW) |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
22
ORDER GRANTING 20 Motion for Attorney Fees Signed by Judge Elizabeth S. Chestney. (wg)
|
|
Filing
15
ORDER ORDERED that the Commissioners decision finding that Plaintiff is not disabled is VACATED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings consistent with this opinion. Signed by Judge Elizabeth S. Chestney. (rg)
|
|
Filing
2
ORDER GRANTING 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs Complaint [#1-1] shall be filed by the Clerk without prepayment of fees, costs or the giving of security, and the Clerk shall, until further Order of this Court, waive the collection of any other fees or costs from Plaintiff. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk issue the summonses attached to Plaintiffs motion [#1-4, #1-5, #1-6]. Signed by Judge Elizabeth S. Chestney. (rg)
|
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 Western 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
| Search for this case: Roxanne Olivan Rosales v. Andrew Saul | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
