Miller v. Colvin
Plaintiff: Rachelle Deann Miller
Defendant: Carolyn W Colvin
Case Number: 2:2015cv01722
Filed: November 2, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Washington
Office: Seattle Office
County: Whatcom
Presiding Judge: James P. Donohue
Presiding Judge: Robert S. Lasnik
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
August 4, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 23 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS by Judge Robert S. Lasnik; the final decision of the Commissioner is reversed and the case is remanded for further administrative proceedings. (CDA)
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 Washington Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Miller 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: Rachelle Deann Miller
Represented By: David A Namba
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
Represented By: Kerry Jane Keefe(Designation Assistant US Attorney)
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?