Cases

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lorenzo Richardson appeals the district court’s order denying his request for mandamus relief and affirming the Commissioner’s denial of disability insurance benefits. We must uphold the decision to deny benefits if the decision is supported by substantial evidence an

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AMOZ L. MAZZANT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Came on for consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action, this matter having been heretofore referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On February 18, 2016, the report of the Magistrate Judge was ente

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Diane Lynn Richardson v. Civil No. 20-cv-489-LM Opinion No. 2021 DNH 134 P Andrew Saul, Commissioner, U.S. Social Security Administration ORDER Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), Diane Lynn Richardson seeks judicial review of the decision of

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MAXINE JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. No. 19-cv-00002 (DLF) KILILO KIJAKAZI,1 Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION The plaintiff brings this case challenging the Social Security Admin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA KEVIN TONEY, Plaintiff, v. No. 1:21-cv-00557-ZMF KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Kevin Toney moves to reverse a decision by Defendant Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commi

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Merrill E. Jones, : : Plaintiff, : v. : Civil Action No. 16-2290 (CKK) : : Social Security Administration, : : Defendant.

USCA4 Appeal: 21-2042 Doc: 42 Filed: 02/22/2023 Pg: 1 of 48 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-2042 SHELLEY C., Plaintiff – Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FERNANDO FONTANEZ, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 17-2844 (RDM) U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Sometimes, the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) pays someone too much money. Receiving a

MEMORANDUM OPINION COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY, District Judge. Plaintiff Brent Edward Crummey (“Crummey”) brought this action against Defendant, the Social Security Administration (the “SSA”), claiming that the SSA ran afoul of the Freedom of Information *118 Act and the Privacy

MEMORANDUM OPINION RICHARD W. ROBERTS, District Judge. This matter brought under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), challenging the denial of a claim for supplemental security income, was referred to Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson for a report and recommendation (“R & R”). In the R & R issue

PER CURIAM: Plaintiff-Appellant George Brault appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Vermont (Murtha, J.) affirming the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“the Commissioner”) denying Brault’s application for disability benefits. We conclude the decision of the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) was supported by substantial e

794 F.Supp.2d 46 (2011) Brent Edward CRUMMEY, Plaintiff, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant. Civil Action No. 10-01560(CKK). United States District Court, District of Columbia. June 30, 2011. *49 Brent Edward Crummey, Houston, TX, pro se. Gabriel R. Martinez, U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, W

MEMORANDUM OPINION BERYL A. HOWELL, District Judge. Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, seeks review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“SSA”) denying her daughter Child’s Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) disability benefits. Plaintiff has written eloquently about the challenges of caring for her da

794 F.Supp.2d 1025 (2011) Michelle Lee KLIBER, Plaintiff, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, and Secretary of Social Security, Defendants. Civ. No. 10-2513 (JJK). United States District Court, D. Minnesota. June 28, 2011. *1028 Michelle Lee Kliber, Elk River, MN, pro se Plaintiff. Lonnie F. Bryan, Esq., Assistant United St

ORDER WILEY Y. DANIEL, Chief Judge. THIS MATTER is before the Court on review of the Commissioner’s decision that denied Plaintiffs claim for disability insurance benefits. For the reasons stated below, this case is reversed and remanded for further fact finding. I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Plaintiff alleges disability beginning May 27, 2008, at whi

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BRENT EDWARD CRUMMEY, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 10-01560 (CKK) SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION (June 30, 2011) tr

ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE NANCY TORRESEN, District Judge. On March 27, 2012, the United States Magistrate Judge filed with the court, with copies to counsel, his Report and Recommended Decision. The time within which to file objections expired on April 16, 2012, and no objections have been filed. The Magistrate Judge notified the parties that failure to object would waive

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MICHAEL D. J. EISENBERG, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 08-1978 (CKK) SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION and MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION (March 29, 2010) Plaintiff Mi

703 F.Supp.2d 27 (2010) Michael D.J. EISENBERG, Plaintiff, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION and Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendants. Civil Action No. 08-1978 (CKK). United States District Court, District of Columbia. March 29, 2010. *28 Michael D.J. Eisenberg, Vienna, VA, pro se. Fr

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ELLEN SEGAL HUVELLE, United States District Judge Plaintiff Wanda Kyler seeks judicial review pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) of the denial of social security disability insurance benefits (“DIB”) on November 2, 2012, following a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”). Pending before the Court are Plaintiffs