Ainab

Ainab v. Kijakazi

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaSeptember 25, 20203:20-cv-01780California2,325 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 |} NACIMO A., Case No.: 3:20-cv-1780-RBM Plaintitt, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S 13 || V- APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN 14 || ANDREW SAUL, COMMISSIONER OF vine Fries OR COSTS SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. [Doc. 2] 18 I. INTRODUCTION On September 10, 2020, Plaintiff Nacimo A. (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c) seeking judicial review of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration’s “Defendant” or “Commissioner”) denial of disability insurance 23 || benefits and supplemental security income under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security 24 || Act (“the Act”). (Doc. 1.) Plaintiff did not pay the required filing fee and instead filed a ||motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP Motion”). (Doc. 2.) On April 8, 2020, Chief Judge Larry A. Burns issued an…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.