Cases 121 - 130 of 195
Fredrickson v. Astrue
as 8:2010cv00280
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Plaintiff:
Quentin M Fredrickson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 416 Denial of Social Security Benefits
Andersen v Astrue
as 4:2010cv03144
Plaintiff:
Susan M. Andersen
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
James v. Astrue
as 4:2010cv03141
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Plaintiff:
Daniel Ray James
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Lowry v. Astrue
as 4:2010cv03136
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Plaintiff:
Karl L Lowry
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 416 Denial of Social Security Benefits
Martin v. Astrue
as 4:2010cv03116
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Plaintiff:
Johnny W Martin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Szafrajda
as 4:2010cv03112
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Plaintiff:
David Lee Szafrajda
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Cook v Astrue
as 4:2010cv03090
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Plaintiff:
Patricia A. Cook
Interested Party:
Office of General Counsel Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Patterson v. Astrue
as 8:2010cv00148
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue and Office of General Counsel Social Security Administration
Plaintiff:
Pamela J. Patterson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Hashem v. Astrue
as 4:2010cv03053
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Plaintiff:
Kathem Hashem
Interested Party:
Office of General Counsel Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1383 Review of HHS Decision
Oberhauser v. Michael J. Astrue
as 4:2010cv03047
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue and Sabrin Marie Oberhauser
Interested Party:
Office of General Counsel Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 402 Social Security Benefits
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.