This case was last updated from PACER on 09/05/2021 at 09:03:02 (UTC).

Gavurla v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Case Summary

On 07/07/2021 Gavurla filed a Government Benefit - Social Security Disability lawsuit against Commissioner of Social Security Administration. This case was filed in U.S. District Courts, South Carolina District. The Judges overseeing this case are J Michelle Childs and Jacquelyn D Austin. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets


Case Details

  • Case Number:


  • Filing Date:


  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Government Benefit - Social Security Disability

  • Courthouse:

    South Carolina District

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

J Michelle Childs

Referral Judge

Jacquelyn D Austin


Party Details


Raju Gavurla


Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Interested Parties

Social Security Administrative Record

US Attorney - Social Security Noticing

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

Laura Puccia Valtorta

903 Calhoun Street

Columbia, SC 29201


Court Documents






Docket Entries

  • 07/08/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#7) TEXT ORDER granting #3 motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jacquelyn D Austin on 7/8/21.(arut) (Entered: 07/08/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/07/2021
  • Docket(#6) Notice: Social Security Case Service. Pursuant to Standing Order 3:21-mc-00212-RBH signed by Chief Judge R. Bryan Harwell, the Clerk has issued a Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) using the Case Management and Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system, notifying the appropriate Regional Social Security Administration Office of the General Counsel and the United States Attorney's Office of the case. No summonses shall issue. Set Answer Deadline - Social Security Complaint: Answer due from Commissioner of Social Security Administration on 1/3/2022 (arut) (Entered: 07/07/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/07/2021
  • Docket(#5) TEXT ORDER: In accordance with the policy of the Judicial Conference of the United States, the Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AOUSC) recently completed a Survey of Magistrate Judge Positions in the District of South Carolina. The report is a district-wide review of the court's magistrate judge positions.By local rule, all social security appeals are automatically referred to magistrate judges on a district-wide rotation for reports and recommendations or final disposition by consent of the parties. According to the report, for the period of 2015-2019, social security appeals in this district increased by 37 percent, and felony criminal cases increased by over 16 percent.The Federal Magistrates Act of 1968 established the magistrate judge's system as a supplemental judicial resource to assist the district courts and provide better service to litigants.The AOUSC report notes that in 2019, of the 350 social security appeals decided in the District of South Carolina, only 27 (7.7 percent) were disposed of by magistrate judges with the parties' consent. According to the report:"Many districts around the country have had great success in encouraging consent to magistrate judges in social security appeal cases. Maximizing dispositions on consent rather than through reports and recommendations could be part of the court's strategy, to the extent it is feasible, for maintaining the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of these cases, as well as realizing the benefits of consent outlined below. Consent to disposition by the magistrate judge can bring about a quicker resolution of the appeal than the report and recommendation process.""Therefore, the court may wish to remind the government and members of the social security bar of the consent option, and its time savings for litigants, by appropriate means (e.g., form letters to parties, status conferences, speaking engagements before the bar)."Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 631, United States Magistrate Judges are appointed by the district court. Such appointments are made after a rigorous application and screening process. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73, a United States Magistrate Judge may, upon consent of the parties, conduct any or all proceedings in a jury or nonjury civil matter and enter a final order in the case.While parties have the right to adjudication of such matters by a District Judge and may withhold consent without adverse substantive consequences, consideration should be given to the referral of social security appeals to a United States Magistrate Judge for final disposition. The U.S. Attorney for the District of South Carolina has entered a Standing Consent Agreement for such referrals. See 3:04-mc-5005.Accordingly, counsel for the Plaintiff is directed to consult with the Plaintiff concerning the foregoing and shall file a status report within 30 days informing the court as to whether Plaintiff consents to disposition by a United States Magistrate Judge. If Plaintiff consents, AO Form 85, found at may be filed in lieu of a status report. (Status Report due by 8/6/2021.) Signed by Honorable J Michelle Childs on 7/7/21. (arut) (Entered: 07/07/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/07/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#3) MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (Restricted Access) by Raju Gavurla. Response to Motion due by 7/21/2021. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. No proposed order. Motions referred to Jacquelyn D Austin.(arut) (Entered: 07/07/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/07/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#1) COMPLAINT against Commissioner of Social Security Administration Clerk's Note: See 28:636(b)(1)(C)(4)(c)(1) and Local Rule 83.VII.02 regarding Consent to Proceed before Magistrate Judge in Social Security cases. Consent to Proceed before Magistrate Judge forms are available on the Court's website., filed by Raju Gavurla.(arut) (Entered: 07/07/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases

Latest cases where Social Security Noticing is a litigant

Latest cases where Social Security Administrative Record is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Laura Puccia Valtorta(Designation Retained)