Cases

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WILLIAM E. POWELL, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 19-44 (JEB) SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Pro se Plaintiff William E. Powell is on a mission to uncover financial information related to his late father and grandfather’s trust

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WILLIAM E. POWELL, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 18-847 (JEB) SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION In this latest of his multiple suits, pro se Plaintiff William E. Powell seeks relief for Defendant Social Security Administration

MEMORANDUM OPINION RANDOLPH D. MOSS, United States District Judge Plaintiffs Ethel Lou West and James West, Jr. filed a complaint against the Social Security Administration on June 23, 2016, alleging underpayment of social security benefits. Dkt. 1 at 5. Although Plaintiffs’ complaint indicates that they live in Fort Worth, Texas, id.

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 15, 2011. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

MEMORANDUM OPINION ROSEMARY M. COLLYER,. United States District Judge This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. For the reasons discussed below, the motion will be granted. I. BACKGROUND . Plaintiff brings this . action under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), see 5 U.S.C. § 552, demanding the disclosure of informatio

ORDER JAMES C. FOX, Senior District Judge. This matter is before the court on the Motions to Dismiss [DE-51; DE-74] filed by Defendants the Social Security Administration and Assad Meymandi, M.D., respectively. Also before the court are the following motions filed by the pro se Plaintiff Pamela Melvin: Motion for a Stay of the Proceedings [DE-88]; Expedited Motion for a Protection Orde

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LEON JONES, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 11-1459 (JEB) ) ) SOCIAL SECURI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ___________________________________ : TALIUE E. DAVIS, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : Civil Action No. 11-0934 (JEB) : SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, :

NEWMAN, PLAGER, and CHEN, Circuit Judges. JUDGMENT PER CURIAM. This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged: AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

TASHIMA, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part: I agree with the majority that the ALJ erred in discrediting Treichler’s medically determinable pain and symptom testimony based on a boilerplate credibility determination. I part company, however, with the majority’s remand for further proceedings. I would, instead, remand for the award of benefits. I, there

JUDGMENT PER CURIAM. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged: AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 86.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: James P. Mayer appeals the district court’s order denying his motion filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b), seeking reconsideration of the order dismissing his social security and disability benefits action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Acc

ON MOTION ORDER James Alston having filed the required Statement Concerning Discrimination, Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The order of dismissal and the mandate are vacated and recalled, and the petition for review is reinstated. (2) The certified list from the Arbitrator is due on or before November 16, 200

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: James P. Mayer appeals the district court’s order denying his motion filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b), seeking reconsideration of the order dismissing his social security and disability benefits action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Acc

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied. Same case below, 334 Fed. Appx. 562.

ORDER The petitioner having failed to file the required Statement Concerning Discrimination, it is ORDERED that the petition for review be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED, for failure to prosecute in accordance with the rules.

ON MOTION ORDER James Alston having filed the required Statement Concerning Discrimination, Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The order of dismissal and the mandate are vacated and recalled, and the petition for review is reinstated. (2) The certified list from the Arbitrator is due on or before November 16, 200

ORDER The petitioner having failed to file the required Statement Concerning Discrimination, it is ORDERED that the petition for review be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED, for failure to prosecute in accordance with the rules.

O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge, dissenting: Because I believe that the ALJ’s Residual Functional Capacity (“RFC”) determination at step four reflects a rational interpretation of Dr. Bennett Goss’s opinion, I must respectfully dissent from the court’s decision. The ALJ credited Dr. Goss’s opinion that Taylor could not work if he was required “to be on his feet for any significant length of time.”

MEMORANDUM ** Daniel Brink (“Brink”) appeals the denial of his application for Supplemental Security Income benefits. The parties are familiar with the facts, which we repeat here only to the extent necessary to explain our decision. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and reverse. We review the Commissioner of Social Security’s (“the Commissioner’s”) denial of benefits de novo. <