Yang v. Berryhill
Plaintiff:
Bao Yang
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Case Number:
2:2016cv01610
Filed:
October 14, 2016
Court:
Washington Western District Court
Office:
Seattle Office
County:
King
Presiding Judge:
Ronald B. Leighton
Referring Judge:
Mary Alice Theiler
Nature of Suit:
Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action:
42:205 Denial Social Security Benefits
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 |
---|---|---|
July 11, 2017 | 19 |
![]() |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Yang v. Berryhill | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Bao Yang | |
Represented By: | Amy Gilbrough |
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 | [ 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 | [ 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.