Cases

24 F.3d 247NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Colvin McCRIGHT, Petitioner-Appellant,v.Daniel B. VASQUEZ, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. No. 93-16361. United States Co

5 F.3d 537NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Colvin McCRIGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.J.C. SIMMS, J.C. Jackson, Daniel Vasquez, D. Wooten, et al.,Defendants-Appellees. No. 92-15729.

995 S.W.2d 302 (1999) VALLEY SHAMROCK, INC., Diamond Shamrock Refining and Marketing Company, and Mary Lou Nieto, Appellants, v. Francisca VASQUEZ, et al., Appellees. No. 13-97-370-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Corpus Christi. June 24, 1999. *304 Jaime Saenz, Rodriguez, Colvin & Chaney, Brownsville, Harold Robert Loftin, Att

OPINION & ORDER Marco A. Hernandez, United States District Judge Plaintiff Kirsten Bowman brings this action seeking judicial review of the Commissioner’s final decision to deny disability insurance benefits (DIB). This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). I affirm the Commissioner’s finding on the issue of Plaintiff’s credibility. However, I conclude that the ALJ erred i

ORDER REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY TO DENY PLAINTIFF SUPPLEMENTAL SOCIAL SECURITY INCOME AND REMANDING FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS Alan C. Kay, Senior United States District Judge For the reasons set forth below, the Court REVERSES the decision of the Commissioner and REMANDS to the ALJ for further administrative proceedings consistent with this Order. BACKGRO

OPINION AND ORDER ANNA J. BROWN, United States District Judge Plaintiff Ronald P. Hase, Jr., seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (SSA) in which she denied Plaintiffs application for Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) under Title II of the Social Security Act. This Court has jurisdiction to review the Commissioner’s final decision pursuant to

OPINION AND ORDER PANNER, Senior District Judge. Plaintiff Jason Andersen (“plaintiff’) seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”) denying his application for Supplemental Security *1089Income (“SSI”) under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. This court has jurisdicti

OPINION AND ORDER Michael H. Simon, United States District Judge Plaintiff, Mrs. Melody F. Anderson, seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”) finding that Plaintiff had medically improved as of January 1, 2012, resulting in the termination of Plaintiffs Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”). For the following reasons, the Commi

ORDER David G. Campbell, United States District Judge Plaintiff Galena Kaye Duarte Lopez seeks review under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security which denied her disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income under sections 216(i), 223(d), and 1614(a)(3)(A) of the Social Security Act. Because the ALJ’s decision contains reversible error and there

OPINION AND ORDER BROWN, District Judge. Plaintiff Nicholas N. Nguyen' seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (SSA) in which she denied Plaintiffs application for Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) under Title II of the Act and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) under Title XVI of the Act. On Jan*

OPINION AND ORDER BROWN, United States District Judge Plaintiff Lyndy M. Slaughter seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (SSA) in which she denied Plaintiffs applications for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) under Titles XVI and II of the Social Security Act. This matter is now bef

OPINION AND ORDER McSHANE, District Judge: Plaintiff Francia M. Gartzke brings this action for judicial review of the Commissioner’s decision denying her application for supplemental security income and disability insurance benefits. This Court has jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3). Gartzke, now ,48 years old, alleges she became disabled on April 1, 2003

OPINION AND ORDER MARSH, District Judge. Plaintiff Audrey Colcord seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying her application for Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-403, and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) disability benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1381-1383Í.

OPINION AND ORDER MICHAEL H. SIMON, District Judge. Ulmaskhon ■ Rustamova (“Plaintiff’) seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”) denying her application for supplemental security income under Title II of the Social Security Act. United States Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman issued Findings and Recommendation (“F & R”

OPINION AND ORDER AIKEN, Chief Judge: Plaintiff Fred A. Osborn brings this action pursuant to the Social Security Act (“Act”) to obtain judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Se*1107curity (“Commissioner”) denying his application for disability insurance benefits (“DIB”). For the reasons set forth below, the Commissio

ORDER Neil V. Wake, United States District Judge. Plaintiff Robert I. Grim seeks review under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“the Commissioner”), which denied him disability insurance benefits under sections 216(i)' and 223(d) of the Social Security Act. Because the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) is not supported by substantial evidenc

AMENDED ORDER David G. Campbell, United States District Judge Pursuant to Plaintiffs unopposed motion to amend (Doe. SO). Plaintiff Robert Glenn Kline seeks review under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, which denied him disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income under sections 216(i), 223(d), and 1614(a)(3)(A) of the Soc

OPINION AND ORDER REDDEN, District Judge. Plaintiff Laura Deanne Forester seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Ad*1120ministration (SSA) in which she denied Plaintiffs application for Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) under Title II of the Social Security Act and Plaintiffs application for Suppl

ORDER Neil V. Wake, Senior United States District Judge Plaintiff Rita Kaduchak seeks review under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“the Commissioner”), which denied her disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income under sections 216®, 223(d), and 1614(a)(3)(A) of the Social Security Act. Because the decision of the Administrative Law Ju

SUMMARY ORDER Plaintiff-appellant Elizabeth Ann Bur-nette appeals from the district court’s judgment entered July 9, 2013 dismissing her complaint with prejudice. Judgment was entered pursuant to the district court’s July 8, 2013 decision and order, which affirmed a decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”) denying Burnette’s application for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) under Title XVI of