This case was last updated from PACER on 08/08/2020 at 10:41:36 (UTC).

Matthew-Pemberton v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

Case Summary

On 06/09/2020 Matthew-Pemberton filed a Government Benefit - Social Security Disability lawsuit against Commissioner Social Security Administration. This case was filed in U.S. District Courts, South Carolina District. The Judges overseeing this case are Jacquelyn D Austin and Timothy M Cain. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    8:20-CV-02183

  • Filing Date:

    06/09/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Government Benefit - Social Security Disability

  • Court:

    U.S. District Courts

  • Courthouse:

    South Carolina District

Judge Details

Referral Judge

Jacquelyn D Austin

Presiding Judge

Timothy M Cain

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

Tarah Matthew-Pemberton

Defendant

Commissioner Social Security Administration

Interested Party

Social Security Administrative Record

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

Paul Townsend McChesney

Attorney at McChesney and McChesney PC

930 South Pine Street

Spartanburg, SC 29302

 

Court Documents

#8

RESTRICTED

#4

RESTRICTED

#3

RESTRICTED

#1

RESTRICTED

 

Docket Entries

  • 07/08/2020
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#8) STATUS REPORT by Tarah Matthew-Pemberton. (McChesney, Paul) (Entered: 07/08/2020)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/15/2020
  • Docket(#7) 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. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, grand jury proceedings were postponed, and criminal jury trials have been continued until July 6, 2020. Most detention facilities have initiated mitigation measures which limit the transportation of inmates and in-person visits, including attorney visits. While the court has held certain hearings by video-conference, these events have necessarily resulted in a backlog of criminal cases which will require attention as such restrictions are relaxed. New criminal cases will be generated once Grand Jury proceedings resume.Criminal cases take priority over civil cases due in part due to the Speedy Trial Act. Once restrictive measures are released, the court anticipates a flood of criminal matters that will require disposition, which must be given priority over civil matters, including social security appeals. This is in addition to a recent increase in filings by federal inmates seeking reduction in sentences and compassionate release pursuant to the First Step Act of 2019.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, only 27 of the 350 social security appeals (0.077 percent) disposed of by magistrate judges in this district were handled by them 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)." The completion of the AO report is prescient considering recent events which will place additional strains on district court resources. 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. It has been the practice of this court to give particular attention to social security appeals given the nature of such actions. However, the impact of increased caseloads, the direct and indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and requirement of docket priority for criminal cases will necessarily affect the court's ability to provide for prompt adjudication of social security cases. Based on the foregoing, consideration should be given to the referral of social security appeals to a United States Magistrate Judge for final disposition. The court is informed that it is the standing policy of the Government in this district to so consent. Accordingly, Plaintiff 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 https://www.uscourts.gov/forms/civil-forms/notice-consent-and-reference-civil-action-magistrate-judge may be filed in lieu of a status report. Entered at the direction of the Honorable Timothy M Cain on 6/15/20. (kmca) (Entered: 06/15/2020)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/10/2020
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#6) TEXT ORDER granting #3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis Signed by Magistrate Judge Jacquelyn D Austin on 6/10/20.(jsmi, ) (Entered: 06/10/2020)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/09/2020
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#4) Summons Issued as to Commissioner Social Security Administration. U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General. (jsmi, ) (Entered: 06/09/2020)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/09/2020
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#3) MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (Restricted Access) by Tarah Matthew-Pemberton. Response to Motion due by 6/23/2020. 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.(jsmi, ) (Entered: 06/09/2020)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/09/2020
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#1) COMPLAINT against Commissioner Social Security Administration ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number IFP.) Clerk's Note: See 28:636(b)(1)(C)(4)(c)(1) and Local Rule 83.VII.02 regarding Consents 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 Tarah Matthew-Pemberton. Service due by 9/8/2020(jsmi, ) (Entered: 06/09/2020)

    Read MoreRead Less