United States Case Law

The following are cases that have a reference to CFS in the case. It has not been sorted according to particular case types or vetted to remove cases that are not CFS related.

Gembus v. MetroHealth Sys., No. 07-3542, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 08a0528n.06;, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 18554; 2008 FED App. 0528N (6th Cir.), August 27, 2008, Filed, NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

Wakkinen v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., No. 06-3054, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, 531 F.3d 575; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 14208, March 16, 2007, Submitted, July 2, 2008, Filed

Lamantia v. Hewlett-Packard Co. Emple. Benefits Org. Income Prot. Plan, No. 07-15400, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 12172, May 28, 2008 ** , Submitted, San Francisco, California** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., June 2, 2008, Filed, PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

United States v. Manragh, No. 07-0144-cr, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 11287, May 27, 2008, Decided, PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

Fleming v. Astrue, No. 06-16411, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 274 Fed. Appx. 571; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 9008, April 16, 2008 ** , Submitted, San Francisco, California** This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., April 21, 2008, Filed, PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

Huffaker v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., NO. 07-5410, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 08a0165n.06;, 271 Fed. Appx. 493; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 6576; 2008 FED App. 0165N (6th Cir.), March 25, 2008, Filed, NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

Rose v. Hartford Fin. Servs. Group, No. 07-5423, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 08a0144n.06;, 268 Fed. Appx. 444; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 5742; 2008 FED App. 0144N (6th Cir.), March 11, 2008, Filed, NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

Hernandez v. SBC Communs., Inc., No. 07-50687 Summary Calendar, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, 265 Fed. Appx. 276; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 2888, February 8, 2008, Filed, PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

Blau v. Astrue, No. 05-35891, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 263 Fed. Appx. 635; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 1150, November 8, 2007 *** , Submitted, Portland, Oregon*** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., January 17, 2008, Filed, PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

10.

Williams v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., No. 06-3824, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, 509 F.3d 317; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 25515; 42 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2850, September 28, 2007, Argued, November 1, 2007, Decided

11.

Post v. Hartford Ins. Co., No. 05-4927, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 501 F.3d 154; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 21911; 41 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1943, January 17, 2007, Argued, September 13, 2007, Opinion Filed

12.

United States v. Kaminski, Nos. 05-3823/3826/4509, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 07a0356p.06;, 501 F.3d 655; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 20944; 2007 FED App. 0356P (6th Cir.), July 27, 2007, Argued, August 31, 2007, Decided, August 31, 2007, Filed, On remand at, Judgment entered by United States v. Kaminski, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34597 (S.D. Ohio, Apr. 28, 2008)

13.

Merrick v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., No. 05-16380, No. 05-17059, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 500 F.3d 1007; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 20959, May 16, 2007, Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California, August 31, 2007, Filed

14.

Corry v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., No. 05-50983, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, 499 F.3d 389; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 20605; 42 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1742, August 28, 2007, Filed

15.

Chang v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., No. 05-56329, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 247 Fed. Appx. 875; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 19950, June 7, 2007, Argued and Submitted, Pasadena, California, August 17, 2007, Filed, PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

16.

Snedeker v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No. 06-2878, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 244 Fed. Appx. 470; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 16093, May 8, 2007, Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a), July 6, 2007, Filed, NOT PRECEDENTIAL OPINION UNDER THIRD CIRCUIT INTERNAL OPERATING PROCEDURE RULE 5.7. SUCH OPINIONS ARE NOT REGARDED AS PRECEDENTS WHICH BIND THE COURT. PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

17.

Kansky v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co., No. 06-2042, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 492 F.3d 54; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 15514; 41 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1796, June 29, 2007, Decided

18.

Iseley v. Beard, NO. 06-2465, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 237 Fed. Appx. 735; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 15376, May 4, 2007, Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a), June 27, 2007, Filed, NOT PRECEDENTIAL OPINION UNDER THIRD CIRCUIT INTERNAL OPERATING PROCEDURE RULE 5.7. SUCH OPINIONS ARE NOT REGARDED AS PRECEDENTS WHICH BIND THE COURT. PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS., Motion denied by Iseley v. Beard, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90280 (M.D. Pa., Dec. 6, 2007)

19.

Stiltz v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., No. 06-15180 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, 244 Fed. Appx. 260; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 12973, June 5, 2007, Decided , June 5, 2007, Filed , PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

20.

Denmark v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., No. 05-2877 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 481 F.3d 16; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 7143; 40 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1685, March 28, 2007, Decided

21.

Ray v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., No. 05-1284 & 05-1420 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 224 Fed. Appx. 772; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 7234; 41 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1466, March 28, 2007, Filed , PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

22.

Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Conger, No. 06-5009 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 07a0016p.06;, 474 F.3d 258; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 848; 2007 FED App. 0016P (6th Cir.), November 1, 2006, Argued , January 16, 2007, Decided , January 16, 2007, Filed , Motion denied by, Costs and fees proceeding at Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Conger, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34014 (W.D. Ky., May 8, 2007)

23.

Frisby v. OPM, 06-3239 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 27681, November 7, 2006, Decided , THIS DECISION WAS ISSUED AS UNPUBLISHED OR NONPRECEDENTIAL AND MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENT. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR RULES GOVERNING CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OR NONPRECEDENTIAL OPINIONS OR ORDERS.

24.

Eady v. Am. Cast Iron Pipe Co., No. 06-11322 Non-Argument Calendar , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, 203 Fed. Appx. 326; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 27244, November 3, 2006, Decided , November 3, 2006, Filed , NOT FOR PUBLICATION

25.

Van der Maas v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No. 05-2588 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 06a0779n.06;, 198 Fed. Appx. 521; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 26125; 2006 FED App. 0779N (6th Cir.), October 19, 2006, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

26.

Iseley v. Beard, NO. 05-2108 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 200 Fed. Appx. 137; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 24744, October 2, 2006, Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) , October 3, 2006, Filed , RULES OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

27.

Muzyka v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., No. 05-14289 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, 195 Fed. Appx. 904; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 23452; 40 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1395, September 13, 2006, Decided , September 13, 2006, Filed , NOT FOR PUBLICATION

28.

Osborn v. Barnhart, No. 06-11269 Non-Argument Calendar , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, 194 Fed. Appx. 654; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 21677, August 24, 2006, Decided , August 24, 2006, Filed , NOT FOR PUBLICATION

29.

Meece v. Barnhart, No. 05-6502 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 06a0569n.06;, 192 Fed. Appx. 456; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 20476; 2006 FED App. 0569N (6th Cir.), August 8, 2006, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

30.

Tingey v. Radionics, No. 04-4216 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 193 Fed. Appx. 747; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 20561; CCH Prod. Liab. Rep. P17,523, August 8, 2006, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

31.

Wangenstein v. Equifax, Inc., No. 05-14288 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, 191 Fed. Appx. 905; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 20112, August 4, 2006, Decided , August 4, 2006, Filed , NOT FOR PUBLICATION

32.

Webster v. Barnhart, No. 05-5170 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 187 Fed. Appx. 857; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 16729, July 3, 2006, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

33.

Izzo v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No. 05-3420 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 186 Fed. Appx. 280; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 16282, April 21, 2006, Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) , June 27, 2006, Filed , RULES OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

34.

McLendon v. Barnhart, No. 05-40366 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, 184 Fed. Appx. 430; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 14270, June 9, 2006, Filed , RULES OF THE FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

35.

Brown v. Barnhart, No. 05-5143 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 182 Fed. Appx. 771; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 13210; 111 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 79, May 25, 2006, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

36.

Jones v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No. 05-16463 Non-Argument Calendar , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, 181 Fed. Appx. 767; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 11814; 110 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 461, May 12, 2006, Decided , May 12, 2006, Filed , NOT FOR PUBLICATION

37.

Wheeler v. Barnhart, No. 05-3316 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, 177 Fed. Appx. 478; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 9433; 110 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 54, March 27, 2006, Argued , April 11, 2006, Decided , RULES OF THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

38.

Bradley v. Barnhart, No. 05-2719 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, 175 Fed. Appx. 87; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 8438; 110 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 65, February 28, 2006, Argued , April 7, 2006, Decided , RULES OF THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

39.

Nawrocki v. United Methodist Ret. Cmtys., No. 05-1058 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 06a0228n.06;, 174 Fed. Appx. 334; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 7939; 2006 FED App. 0228N (6th Cir.), March 31, 2006, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

40.

Donnell v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., No. 04-2340 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, 165 Fed. Appx. 288; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 3073, December 1, 2005, Argued , February 8, 2006, Decided , RULES OF THE FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

41.

Pralutsky v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., No. 04-2409, No. 04-3239 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, 435 F.3d 833; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 1142; 36 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2092, May 12, 2005, Submitted , January 19, 2006, Filed , Rehearing denied by, Rehearing, en banc, denied by Pralutsky v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 6898 (8th Cir., Mar. 20, 2006)US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Pralutsky v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 2006 U.S. LEXIS 7223 (U.S., Oct. 2, 2006)

42.

Bridges v. Barnhart, No. 05-6134 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 162 Fed. Appx. 828; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 861; 110 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 345, January 12, 2006, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

43.

Lee v. Rheem Mfg. Co., No. 05-1558 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, 432 F.3d 849; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 28772; 97 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 118; 87 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) P42,199, October 12, 2005, Submitted , December 28, 2005, Filed , Rehearing denied by, Rehearing, en banc, denied by Lee v. Rheem Mfg. Co., 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 3436 (8th Cir., Feb. 13, 2006)

44.

Slomcenski v. Citibank, N.A., No. 04-11245 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, 432 F.3d 1271; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 27270; 17 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 707; 36 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1721; 19 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 121; Accom. Disabilities Dec. (CCH) 12-105, December 14, 2005, Decided , December 14, 2005, Filed

45.

Morris v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., No. 04-2654 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 430 F.3d 500; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 26550; 63 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 671, December 6, 2005, Decided , US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Morris v. UNUM Life Ins. Co., 126 S. Ct. 2355, 165 L. Ed. 2d 279, 2006 U.S. LEXIS 4364 (U.S., 2006)Related proceeding at Morris v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., 2006 Mass. App. LEXIS 767 (Mass. App. Ct., July 14, 2006)

46.

Albert v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., No. 04-20933 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, 156 Fed. Appx. 649; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 26457, December 2, 2005, Filed , RULES OF THE FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

47.

Manley v. Barnhart, No. 04-3617 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, 154 Fed. Appx. 532; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 25055; 108 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 380, August 2, 2005, Argued , November 17, 2005, Decided , RULES OF THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

48.

Robinson v. Wolfe, No. 05-1640 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, 154 Fed. Appx. 510; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 24605, November 10, 2005*, Submitted* After an examination of the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., November 15, 2005, Decided , RULES OF THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

49.

Walker v. Barnhart, No. 03-56998 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 148 Fed. Appx. 632; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 20380; 107 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 487, September 16, 2005**, Submitted, Pasadena, California** This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., September 20, 2005, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

50.

Gatti v. Reliance Std. Life Ins. Co., No. 03-15562, No. 03-16183 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 415 F.3d 978; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 14955; 35 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1006, May 31, 2005, Resubmitted, San Francisco, California , July 22, 2005, Amended Opinion and Concurrence Filed , On remand at, Summary judgment granted by, Summary judgment denied by, Motion to strike granted by, Motion denied by, Moot Gatti v. Reliance Std. Life Ins. Co., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11844 (D. Ariz., Mar. 13, 2006)

51.

Gant v. United States, 05-5045 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 417 F.3d 1328; 131 Fed. Appx. 292; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 8439, May 11, 2005, Decided , The Publication Status of this Document has been Changed by the Court from Unpublished to Published August 3, 2005. Rehearing denied by, Rehearing, en banc, denied by Gant v. United States, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 16925 (Fed. Cir., July 25, 2005)US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Gant v. United States, 2005 U.S. LEXIS 8752 (U.S., Nov. 28, 2005)

52.

Arbas v. Nicholson, 04-7107 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 403 F.3d 1379; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 5993, April 13, 2005, Decided , On remand at, Motion granted by, Dismissed by Arbas v. Nicholson, 2005 U.S. App. Vet. Claims LEXIS 681 (U.S. App. Vet. Cl., Nov. 1, 2005)

53.

Cook v. Life Investors Ins. Co. of Am., No. 04-5161 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 126 Fed. Appx. 722; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 5251, March 30, 2005, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

54.

Norris v. Baxter Healthcare Corp., No. 03-1471 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 397 F.3d 878; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 1987; 66 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (Callaghan) 500; CCH Prod. Liab. Rep. P17,317, February 8, 2005, Filed

55.

Moore v. Barnhart, No. 03-3253 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 114 Fed. Appx. 983; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 24197; 101 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 258, November 19, 2004, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

56.

Locher v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., Docket No. 03-9229 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 389 F.3d 288; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 23776; 34 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1018, October 6, 2004, Argued , November 12, 2004, Decided , As Amended, December 3, 2004.

57.

Heard v. Barnhart, No. 04-7010 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 110 Fed. Appx. 88; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 20335; 100 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 390, September 27, 2004, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

58.

Tesche v. Cont'l Cas. Co., NO. 03-2078 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 109 Fed. Appx. 495; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 18886, March 22, 2004, Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) , September 7, 2004, Filed , RULES OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

59.

Welch v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., No. 02-3220 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 382 F.3d 1078; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 18507; 33 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1871, September 1, 2004, Filed , On remand at, Summary judgment granted by, Summary judgment denied by, Judgment entered by Welch v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91796 (D. Kan., Dec. 13, 2007)

60.

Wittwer v. Barnhart, No. 03-3567 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, 103 Fed. Appx. 929; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 16082, July 8, 2004, Submitted , August 5, 2004, Filed , RULES OF THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

61.

Garside v. Barnhart, No. 04-7006 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT , 113 Fed. Appx. 300; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 13991; 101 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 107, July 7, 2004, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

62.

Heffernan v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., 02-3412 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 101 Fed. Appx. 99; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 11836; 33 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1823, June 11, 2004, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

63.

Bonolis v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., No. 03-1659 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, 100 Fed. Appx. 161; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 11223, May 4, 2004, Argued , June 8, 2004, Decided , RULES OF THE FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

64.

Crosby v. Barnhart, No. 03-4018 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 98 Fed. Appx. 923; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 9649, May 12, 2004, Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) , May 18, 2004, Filed , RULES OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

65.

Cainglit v. Barnhart, No. 03-7004 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 85 Fed. Appx. 71; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 25523, December 17, 2003, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

66.

Morris v. Barnhart, No. 03-1332 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 78 Fed. Appx. 820; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 22054; 91 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 220, September 16, 2003, Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) , October 28, 2003, Filed , RULES OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

67.

Nichols v. Verizon Communs., No. 02-3521 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 78 Fed. Appx. 209; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 21207; 31 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2447, September 3, 2003, Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) , October 20, 2003, Filed , RULES OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

68.

Coffman v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., No. 02-2128 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, 77 Fed. Appx. 174; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 20373, April 30, 2003, Submitted , October 7, 2003, Decided , RULES OF THE FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

69.

Holiday v. Barnhart, No. 03-1205 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 76 Fed. Appx. 479; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 20425, October 3, 2003, Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) , October 6, 2003, Filed , RULES OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

70.

Bartyzel v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No. 01-4161 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 74 Fed. Appx. 515; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 18054; 90 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 11, August 26, 2003, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

71.

Boardman v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., No. 02-2277 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 337 F.3d 9; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 14672, July 23, 2003, Decided

72.

Walshe v. Barnhart, No. 02-16907 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 70 Fed. Appx. 929; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 14417, July 11, 2003 **, Submitted, Pasadena, California** This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., July 16, 2003, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

73.

Crouse v. United States RRB, No. 02-61035 Summary Calendar , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, 70 Fed. Appx. 210; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 20837, July 14, 2003, Filed , RULES OF THE FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

74.

Green-Younger v. Barnhart, Docket No. 02-6133 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 335 F.3d 99; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 13832; 61 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (Callaghan) 1253; 89 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 256; Unemployment Ins. Rep. (CCH) P17,073B; Unemployment Ins. Rep. (CCH) P17,367B, March 20, 2003, Argued , July 10, 2003, Decided , As Amended July 16, 2003. Costs and fees proceeding at, Motion granted by Green-Younger v. Barnhart, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21083 (D. Conn., Sept. 30, 2004)

75.

Lemaire v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., Case No: 02-2533 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 69 Fed. Appx. 88; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 13421; 30 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2276, April 3, 2003, Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) , June 30, 2003, Filed , RULES OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

76.

Maniatty v. UNUMprovident Corp., No. 02-9105 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 62 Fed. Appx. 413; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 9383, May 15, 2003, Decided , RULES OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Maniatty v. Unumprovident Corp., 2003 U.S. LEXIS 7719 (U.S., Oct. 20, 2003)

77.

Cooney v. Consol. Edison, No. 02-9263 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 63 Fed. Appx. 579; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 9438, May 13, 2003, Decided , RULES OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

78.

Hawkins v. First Union Corp. Long-Term Disability Plan, No. 02-3100 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, 326 F.3d 914; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 7501; 30 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2374, February 25, 2003, Argued , April 22, 2003, Decided

79.

Roach v. Prudential Ins. Brokerage, Inc., No. 02-4042 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 62 Fed. Appx. 294; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 7232, April 16, 2003, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

80.

Ramos v. Barnhart, No. 02-1687 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 60 Fed. Appx. 334; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 5504, March 21, 2003, Decided , RULES OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Subsequent appeal at Ramos v. Barnhart, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 14180 (1st Cir. N.H., July 9, 2004)

81.

COOK v. LIBERTY LIFE ASSUR. CO., No. 02-1656 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 320 F.3d 11; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 1959, February 5, 2003; , Costs and fees proceeding at, Application denied by Cook v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 13494 (1st Cir. N.H., July 3, 2003)

82.

Brigham v. Sun Life of Can., No. 02-1237 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 317 F.3d 72; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 1339; 29 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2694, January 28, 2003, Decided

83.

Buffa v. N.J. State Dep't of Judiciary, No: 01-4094 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 56 Fed. Appx. 571; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 831, December 10, 2002, Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) , January 14, 2003, Opinion Filed , RULES OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

84.

Harris-Dubose v. Delta Family-Care Disability & Survivorship Plan, NO. 02-1267 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 53 Fed. Appx. 660; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 26519, December 13, 2002, Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) , December 19, 2002, Filed , RULES OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

85.

Giese v. Barnhart, No. 01-17196 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 55 Fed. Appx. 799; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 26416, December 6, 2002 **, Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California** This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., December 19, 2002, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

86.

Hill v. Metro. Gov't of Nashville & Davidson County, No. 02-5305 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT , 54 Fed. Appx. 199; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 26276, December 17, 2002, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

87.

Parven-Mcgladdery v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No. 02-1052 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 52 Fed. Appx. 773; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 25822, December 11, 2002, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

88.

Provident Life & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Ginther, No. 02-7356 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 51 Fed. Appx. 72; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 24054, November 21, 2002, Decided , RULES OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Related proceeding at Ginther v. Provident Life & Cas. Ins. Co., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21266 (W.D.N.Y., Mar. 21, 2007)

89.

Biewen v. Barnhart, No. 01-3955 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, 50 Fed. Appx. 797; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 23589, October 11, 2002, Submitted , November 14, 2002, Filed , RULES OF THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

90.

Owens v. Barnhart, No. 00-35998 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 48 Fed. Appx. 624; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 21138, September 11, 2002, Argued and Submitted, Portland, Oregon , October 3, 2002, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

91.

Lawson v. Fortis Ins. Co., Nos. 01-3316, 01-3355, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 301 F.3d 159; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 17410, July 15, 2002, Argued , August 22, 2002, Filed

92.

Wilkins v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., No. 01-2787, No. 01-3161, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, 299 F.3d 945; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 16434; 28 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2872, April 18, 2002, Submitted , August 14, 2002, Filed

93.

Luckenbach v. Barnhart, No. 01-3848, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, 36 Fed. Appx. 872; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 11656, June 6, 2002, Submitted , June 13, 2002, Filed , RULES OF THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

94.

Stolz v. Massanari, No. 01-3595 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 36 Fed. Appx. 714; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 11420, May 7, 2002, Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) , June 12, 2002, Filed , RULES OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

95.

Frost v. Intel Corp., No. 01-15972, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 37 Fed. Appx. 295; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 11706, April 11, 2002, Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California , June 11, 2002, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

96.

Frybarger v. Barnhart, No. 00-17252, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 35 Fed. Appx. 619; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 10083, May 13, 2002 ***, Submitted*** This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., May 24, 2002, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

97.

Weixel v. Bd. of Educ. of N.Y., Docket No. 00-9149, 00-9150, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 287 F.3d 138; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 5299, October 31, 2001, Argued , March 29, 2002, Decided

98.

Dunnigan v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., Docket No. 00-7399, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 277 F.3d 223; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 337; 27 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1257, December 20, 2000, Argued , January 9, 2002, Decided

99.

Vega v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No. 00-14934, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, 265 F.3d 1214; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 20637; 14 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 1266; 76 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 166; Unemployment Ins. Rep. (CCH) P16,632B, September 20, 2001, Decided , September 20, 2001, Filed

100.

Alexander v. Apfel, No. 00-5710, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 17 Fed. Appx. 298; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 18950, August 16, 2001, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

101.

Hollis v. Fla. State Univ., No. 00-11627., UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, 259 F.3d 1295; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 16954; 14 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 1051, July 30, 2001, Decided , July 30, 2001, Filed

102.

Mastro v. Apfel, No. 00-1105, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, 270 F.3d 171; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 15694, November 1, 2000, Argued , July 5, 2001, Decided , Motion granted: Mastro v. Apfel, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 23201 (4th Cir. Oct. 26, 2001).

103.

Sawyer v. Std. Ins. Co., No. 99-17488, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 8 Fed. Appx. 814; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 8910, April 13, 2001, Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California , May 7, 2001, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

104.

Buxton v. Halter, No. 00-3429, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 246 F.3d 762; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 6170; 2001 FED App. 0110P (6th Cir.); 73 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 273; Unemployment Ins. Rep. (CCH) P16,653B, March 14, 2001, Submitted , April 12, 2001, Decided , April 12, 2001, Filed

105.

Ingram v. Martin Marietta Long Term Disability Income Plan for Salaried Emples., No. 99-55581, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 244 F.3d 1109; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 5537; 25 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2477; 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Service 2728; 2001 Daily Journal DAR 3369, November 17, 2000, Argued and Submitted, Pasadena, California , April 4, 2001, Filed

106.

Owens v. Apfel, No. 99-4261, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 7 Fed. Appx. 408; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 6226, March 21, 2001, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

107.

O'Connor v. Pan Am Corp., No. 00-5028, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 5 Fed. Appx. 48; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 3832, March 12, 2001, Decided , RULES OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

108.

Dwyer v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., No. 00-1514, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, 4 Fed. Appx. 133; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 1541, November 2, 2000, Argued , February 5, 2001, Decided , RULES OF THE FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 6701.

109.

Durley v. APAC, Inc., No. 99-10917, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, 236 F.3d 651; 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 33725; 84 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1177; 79 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) P40,382; 14 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 281, December 26, 2000, Decided , December 26, 2000, Filed

110.

Gardner-Renfro v. Apfel, No. 00-6077, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 32178; 2000 Colo. J. C.A.R. 6697, December 18, 2000, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 36762.

111.

Miller v. Apfel, No. 99-35412, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 27260, September 14, 2000, Argued and Submitted, Portland, Oregon , October 25, 2000, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 37040.

112.

Lowe v. Apfel, No. 98-16785, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 23322, March 16, 2000, Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California , September 12, 2000, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 35836.

113.

Bartle v. Apfel, No. 99-55315, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 22658, August 9, 2000, Argued and Submitted, Pasadena, California , August 30, 2000, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 30586.

114.

McPhaul v. Madison County Board of Comm'rs, No. 99-1092, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, 226 F.3d 558; 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 20684, February 18, 2000, Argued , August 16, 2000, Decided , Certiorari Denied March 19, 2001, Reported at: 2001 U.S. LEXIS 2212.

115.

Courson v. Bert Bell NFL Player Retirement Plan, No. 99-3279, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 214 F.3d 136; 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 11972; 24 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2166, March 21, 2000, Argued , May 31, 2000, Filed

116.

Bressmer v. Federal Express Corp. Long Term Disability Plan, No. 99-9225, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 11024, May 16, 2000, Decided , RULES OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 16698.

117.

Martinez v. Pacificorp, No. 99-4138, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 8542; 2000 Colo. J. C.A.R. 2395, April 28, 2000, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 15146.

118.

Thurman v. Apfel, No. 99-3587, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 8083, April 20, 2000, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28(g) LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28(g) BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 14789.

119.

Herzberger v. Standard Ins. Co., No. 99-1944, No. 99-3116, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, 205 F.3d 327; 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 2579; 24 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1083, January 12, 2000, Argued , February 23, 2000, Decided

120.

Moore v. Berg Enters., No. 98-4080, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 30481; 1999 Colo. J. C.A.R. 6373, November 23, 1999, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 36485.

121.

Rock v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., No. 98-1387, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 29859; 1999 Colo. J. C.A.R. 6306, November 15, 1999, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 35644.

122.

Aberle v. Integrity Life Ins. Co. Short Term Disability Plan, No. 98-55373, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 29473, October 4, 1999, Argued and Submitted, Pasadena, California , November 4, 1999, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 36566.

123.

O'Bryhim v. Reliance Std. Life Ins. Co., No. 98-1472 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 19232, March 3, 1999, Argued , August 16, 1999, Decided , RULES OF THE FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 28296.

124.

Abdus-Sabur v. Callahan, No. 98-2242, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 17823, July 27, 1999, Decided , RULES OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 21600.

125.

Wolk v. UNUM Life Ins. of Am., No. 98-3542, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 186 F.3d 352; 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 14650; 23 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1377, February 19, 1999, Argued , June 30, 1999, Filed , As Amended July 20, 1999. Certiorari Denied January 10, 2000, Reported at: 2000 U.S. LEXIS 142.

126.

Friedrich v. Intel Corp., No. 97-16623, No. 97-17183, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 181 F.3d 1105; 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 14947; 28 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1339; 99 Cal. Daily Op. Service 5144; 99 Daily Journal DAR 6631, December 8, 1998, Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California , June 29, 1999, Filed

127.

Springer v. Maricopa County Med. Ctr., No. 97-17091, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 12062, April 14, 1999, Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California , June 9, 1999, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 26084. Certiorari Denied January 18, 2000, Reported at: 2000 U.S. LEXIS 637.

128.

Hendrix v. Standard Ins. Co., No. 97-17021, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 9777, April 16, 1999, Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California , May 18, 1999, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 24052.

129.

DuMond v. Centex Corp., No. 98-1493, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, 172 F.3d 618; 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 6651, December 18, 1998, Submitted , April 9, 1999, Filed

130.

Hamilton v. Apfel, No. 98-5508, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 6398, April 6, 1999, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 206 LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 206 BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 19379.

131.

Shoberg v. Standard Ins. Co., No. 97-35793, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 3541, February 2, 1999, Argued and Submitted, Seattle, Washington , March 3, 1999, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 10495.

132.

Frankovich v. Apfel, No. 97-55488, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 1437, December 11, 1998 ***, Submitted, Pasadena, California*** This panel unanimously agrees that this case is appropriate for submission without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2), January 29, 1999, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 6738.

133.

Hodge v. Office of Personnel Mgmt., 98-3389, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 660, January 11, 1999, Decided , RULES OF THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 19842.

134.

Sweat v. Apfel, NO. 97-35895, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 28510, September 14, 1998, Argued and Submitted, Portland, Oregon , November 12, 1998, Filed , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 36150.

135.

Lips v. American Community Mut. Ins. Co., No. 97-1139, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 27105; 1998 Colo. J. C.A.R. 5528, October 23, 1998, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 34660.

136.

Reddick v. Chater, No. 97-15111, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 157 F.3d 715; 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 24646; 98 Cal. Daily Op. Service 7628; 98 Daily Journal DAR 10597; 58 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 332; Unemployment Ins. Rep. (CCH) P16,105B, February 12, 1998, Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California , October 6, 1998, Filed

137.

Stoops v. One Call Communs., No. 97-1895, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, 141 F.3d 309; 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 6446; 135 Lab. Cas. (CCH) P33,666, December 1, 1997, Argued , March 31, 1998, Decided

138.

Life Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. Centennial Life Ins. Co., Nos. 96-3253, 96-3301, 96-3332, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 520; 1998 Colo. J. C.A.R. 195, January 14, 1998, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 3302.

139.

Bakalarski v. Apfel, No. 97-1107, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 34055; 1997 Colo. J. C.A.R. 3127, December 3, 1997, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 39246.

140.

Puente v. Callahan, No. 97-1056, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 18038; 1997 Colo. J. C.A.R. 1275, July 18, 1997, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 117 F.3d 1428, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 24114.

141.

Lorenzen v. Callahan, No. 96-35608, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 17946, July 9, 1997 ***, Submitted, Portland, Oregon*** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for submission on the record and briefs without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4., July 15, 1997, FILED , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 119 F.3d 6, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 25826.

142.

Petralia v. AT&T Global Info. Solutions Co., No. 96-2007, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 114 F.3d 352; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 14487, June 12, 1997, Decided

143.

Dufresne v. Veneman, No. 95-56774, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 114 F.3d 952; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 13408; 6 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1549; 97 Cal. Daily Op. Service 4316; 97 Daily Journal DAR 7231, September 16, 1996, Argued, Submitted, Pasadena, California; April 7, 1997, Submission Withdrawn; June 2, 1997, Resubmitted , June 9, 1997, Filed

144.

Pennington v. Chater, No. 96-5177, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 13171, June 5, 1997, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 113 F.3d 1246, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 18505.

145.

Mitchell v. Eastman Kodak Co., No. 96-7034, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 113 F.3d 433; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 10766; 21 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1199, October 24, 1996, Argued , May 8, 1997, Filed , As Corrected May 21, 1997.

146.

Podolan v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., No. 95-36145, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 2060, January 8, 1997, Argued and Submitted, Seattle, Washington , February 4, 1997, FILED , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 107 F.3d 17; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 7249.

147.

Adams v. Chater, No. 95-3289, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 93 F.3d 712; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 21929; 51 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 451; Unemployment Ins. Rep. (CCH) P15,533B, August 26, 1996, Filed

148.

McNemar v. Disney Store, No. 95-1590, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 91 F.3d 610; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 18902; 5 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1227, June 11, 1996, Argued , July 31, 1996, Filed , Certiorari Denied February 18, 1997, Reported at: 1997 U.S. LEXIS 799.

149.

Kennedy v. Applause, Inc., Nos. 95-55017, 95-55549, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 90 F.3d 1477; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 18786; 35 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 927; 5 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1249; 96 Cal. Daily Op. Service 5647; 96 Daily Journal DAR 9197, May 9, 1996, Argued and Submitted, Pasadena, California , July 31, 1996, Filed

150.

Snow v. Standard Ins. Co., No. 95-55515, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 87 F.3d 327; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 14942; 20 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1375; 96 Cal. Daily Op. Service 4487; 96 Daily Journal DAR 7305, June 5, 1996, Argued, Submitted, Pasadena, California , June 21, 1996, Filed

151.

Hernandez v. Chater, No. 95-15332, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 16549, June 14, 1996, ** Submitted, San Francisco, California ** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4., June 19, 1996, FILED , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 87 F.3d 1319, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 31441.

152.

Maske v. Chater, No. 94-16849, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 13554, March 14, 1996, *** Submitted, San Francisco, California *** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4., May 24, 1996, FILED , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 86 F.3d 1162, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 42008.

153.

Adams v. Chater, No. 95-3289, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 11787, May 22, 1996, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.

154.

Guinn v. Chater, No. 95-7127, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 9992, April 30, 1996, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 83 F.3d 431, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 32005.

155.

Johnson v. Chater, No. 95-55172, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 8556, March 26, 1996, *** Submitted *** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4., April 1, 1996, FILED , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 82 F.3d 423, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 21609.

156.

Lovett v. Commissioner of Social Sec., No. 95-5703, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 10129, March 26, 1996, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 24 LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 24 BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 81 F.3d 160, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 18017.

157.

Sarchet v. Chater, No. 95-3283, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, 78 F.3d 305; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 3882, January 23, 1996, Argued , March 5, 1996, Decided

158.

Dahl v. HEM Pharmaceutical Corp., C.A. No. 94-16371, C.A. No. 94-16456, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 2549, January 10, 1996, Argued and Submitted , February 2, 1996, FILED , RULES OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 76 F.3d 385, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 7128.

159.

Morley v. Ciba-Geigy Corp., Docket No. 94-9250, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 66 F.3d 21; 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 25978; 68 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1624; 33 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 573, June 20, 1995, Submitted , September 13, 1995, Decided

160.

Martinez v. Chater, No. 95-50042 (Summary Calendar), UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, 64 F.3d 172; 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24456; 48 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 703; Unemployment Ins. Rep. (CCH) P14,784B, July 10, 1995, Decided , Reported in Table Case Format at: 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 21287.

161.

Saunders v. Chater, No. 94-7120, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 13040, May 30, 1995, Filed , RULES OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 56 F.3d 78, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 19583.

162.

Michele v. Ncr Corp., No. 94-3518 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 11608, May 15, 1995, FILED , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 24 LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 24 BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 54 F.3d 776, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17740.

163.

Emmott v. Consolidated Freightways, No. 94-3437, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 9482, April 21, 1995, FILED , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 24 LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 24 BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 52 F.3d 325, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17996.

164.

Mongeluzo v. Baxter Travenol Long Term Disability Benefit Plan, No. 93-55702, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 46 F.3d 938; 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 1759; 18 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2771; 95 Cal. Daily Op. Service 773; 95 Daily Journal DAR 1418, November 2, 1994, Argued, Submitted, Pasadena, California , January 31, 1995, Filed

165.

Dennis v. Standard Ins. Co., No. 93-35391, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 37288, November 3, 1994, Argued, Submitted, Portland, Oregon , December 29, 1994, Filed , THIS DISPOSITION IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR PUBLICATION AND MAY NOT BE CITED TO OR BY THE COURTS OF THIS CIRCUIT EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY THE 9TH CIR. R. 36-3. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 45 F.3d 435, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 40286.

166.

Greenspan v. Shalala, No. 93-5131., UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, 38 F.3d 232; 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 32921; 46 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 3; Unemployment Ins. Rep. (CCH) P14,224B, November 21, 1994, Decided , Rehearing Denied December 30, 1994, Reported at: 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 37560.

167.

Hembd v. Shalala, No. 93-55713, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 31502, November 3, 1994, ** Submitted, Pasadena, California** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4., November 8, 1994, Filed , THIS DISPOSITION IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR PUBLICATION AND MAY NOT BE CITED TO OR BY THE COURTS OF THIS CIRCUIT EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY THE 9TH CIR. R. 36-3. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 39 F.3d 1187, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 37802.

168.

Rose v. Shalala, No. 94-1013, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 34 F.3d 13; 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 24235; Unemployment Ins. Rep. (CCH) P14,101B, September 7, 1994, Decided

169.

Tuohy v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., No. 93-1814, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 22923, August 22, 1994, Filed , NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 24 LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 24 BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 34 F.3d 1068, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 31820.

170.

Runda v. Shalala, No. 93-2876, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 14948, April 7, 1994, Argued , June 15, 1994, Decided , UNPUBLISHED ORDER NOT TO BE CITED PER SEVENTH CIRCUIT RULE 53. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 27 F.3d 569, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 23569.

171.

Gasaway v. Northwestern Mut. Life. Ins. Co., No. 93-16235, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 26 F.3d 957; 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 13865; 94 Cal. Daily Op. Service 4256; 94 Daily Journal DAR 7898, May 10, 1994, Argued, Submitted, Honolulu, Hawaii , June 9, 1994, Filed

172.

Marshall v. UNUM Life Ins. Co., No. 93-1017, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, 13 F.3d 282; 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 12, October 12, 1993, Submitted , January 3, 1994, Filed

173.

Sisco v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs., No. 93-6040, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, 10 F.3d 739; 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 31055; Unemployment Ins. Rep. (CCH) P17,654A, November 30, 1993, Filed

174.

Ringle v. Shalala, No. 92-35224, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 30973, November 5, 1993, *** Submitted, Seattle, Washington*** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4., November 17, 1993, Filed , THIS DISPOSITION IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR PUBLICATION AND MAY NOT BE CITED TO OR BY THE COURTS OF THIS CIRCUIT EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY THE 9TH CIR. R. 36-3. , Reported in Table Case Format at: 12 F.3d 1108, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 36540.

175.

Dahl v. HEM Pharmaceuticals Corp., Nos. 91-16897, 92-15093, No. 92-15117, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 7 F.3d 1399; 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 26606; 93 Cal. Daily Op. Service 7590; 93 Daily Journal DAR 12963, December 17, 1992, Argued, Submitted, San Francisco, California , October 13, 1993, Filed

176.

Irey v. Sullivan, No. 91-56335, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 11643, April 7, 1993, ** Submitted, Pasadena, California** The panel finds this case appropriate for submission without oral argument pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 34(a) and Ninth Cir. R. 34-4., May 12, 1993, Filed , THIS DISPOSITION IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR PUBLICATION AND MAY NOT BE CITED TO OR BY THE COURTS OF THIS CIRCUIT EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY THE 9TH CIR. R. 36-3. , Reported as Table Case at: 993 F.2d 882, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 18271.

177.

Whyde v. Office of Personnel Management, 92-3209, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 7649, April 2, 1993, Decided , RULE 47.8. OPINIONS AND ORDERS DESIGNATED AS UNPUBLISHED SHALL NOT BE EMPLOYED AS PRECEDENT BY THIS COURT, AND MAY NOT BE CITED BY COUNSEL, EXCEPT IN SUPPORT OF A CLAIM OF RES JUDICATA, COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL, OR LAW OF THE CASE. ANY PERSON MAY REQUEST THAT AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION OR ORDER BE REPREPARED AND REISSUED FOR PUBLICATION, CITING REASONS THEREFOR. SUCH REQUEST WILL BE GRANTED OR DENIED BY THE PANEL THAT RENDERED THE DECISION.

178.

United States v. Lebeau, No. 92-2724, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 1501, December 4, 1992, Argued , January 28, 1993, Decided , UNPUBLISHED ORDER NOT TO BE CITED PER SEVENTH CIRCUIT RULE 53. , Reported as Table case at 985 F.2d 563, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 6851.

179.

United States v. Pandey, No. 91-2219, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 30766, November 23, 1992, Decided , RULES OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT. , Reported as Table Case at 979 F.2d 844, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 35946.

180.

Cohen v. Secretary of HHS, No. 91-2011, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 964 F.2d 524; 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 9948; 37 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 341; Unemployment Ins. Rep. (CCH) P21,924, April 3, 1992, Argued , May 7, 1992, Decided , May 7, 1992, Filed , As Amended June 12, 1992. Rehearing Denied June 12, 1992, Reported at 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 13471. Second Petition for Rehearing Denied June 30, 1992, Reported at 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 15232. Third Petition for Rehearing Denied May 20, 1993, Reported at: 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 13367.

181.

Gent v. CUNA Mut. Ins. Soc'y, CIVIL ACTION NO. 06-11080-GAO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66467, September 2, 2008, Decided

182.

Pettit v. Comm'r, SSA, Case No. CV 07-344-N-LMB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66128, August 27, 2008, Decided, August 27, 2008, Filed

183.

Rice v. Jefferson Pilot Fin. Ins. Co., Case No. 2:07-CV-0547, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO, EASTERN DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64851, August 25, 2008, Filed

184.

Curtis v. Peake, NO. 06-0892, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS, 2008 U.S. App. Vet. Claims LEXIS 968, August 21, 2008, Decided, DESIGNATED FOR ELECTRONIC PUBLISHING ONLY PURSUANT TO U.S. VET. APP. R. 30(a), THIS ACTION MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENT.

185.

Ginsberg v. Astrue, 05 CV 3696, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63447, August 18, 2008, Decided, August 18, 2008, Filed

186.

Joseph v. Albertsons, Civil Action No.: 07-1852(FLW), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58370, July 29, 2008, Decided, July 30, 2008, Filed

187.

Young v. Burton, Civil Action No. 07cv0983 (ESH), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, CIVIL DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57446, July 22, 2008, Decided

188.

Scott v. Astrue, No. CIV S-07-0563 JAM GGH, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56816, July 22, 2008, Decided, July 23, 2008, Filed

189.

Buzby v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 04-cv-02631 WYD, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65702, July 21, 2008, Decided, July 21, 2008, Filed

190.

Rutherford v. Scene 7 Inc. Long Term Disability Plan, No. C 07-06426 WHA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55351, July 18, 2008, Decided, July 18, 2008, Filed

191.

Jonathan v. Peake, NO. 06-2469, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS, 2008 U.S. App. Vet. Claims LEXIS 820, July 16, 2008, Decided, DESIGNATED FOR ELECTRONIC PUBLICATION ONLY PURSUANT TO U.S. VET. APP. R. 30(a), THIS ACTION MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENT.

192.

Erickson v. Astrue, No. C07-3024-MWB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA, CENTRAL DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54686, July 16, 2008, Decided, NOT FOR PUBLICATION

193.

Castro-Medina v. P&G Commer. Co., CIV. NO. 04-2274 (PG), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53408, June 28, 2008, Decided

194.

Carson v. Astrue, CIVIL ACTION NO. CV07-0997-A, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63071, June 27, 2008, Decided, June 27, 2008, Filed, Adopted by, Dismissed by Carson v. Astrue, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55583 (W.D. La., July 22, 2008)

195.

Walker v. Astrue, No. CV 05-5048 FFM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46079, June 10, 2008, Decided, June 10, 2008, Filed

196.

Ashcraft v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., Civil Action No. 7:05-CV-1342 (GLS/DEP), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57329, June 9, 2008, Decided, June 9, 2008, Filed, Motion granted by, Remanded by, Accepted by Ashcraft v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57310 (N.D.N.Y, July 28, 2008)

197.

Bond v. Astrue, Civil No. 4:07-cv-04056, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS, TEXARKANA DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44306, June 4, 2008, Decided, June 4, 2008, Filed

198.

Alford v. Hartford Life Ins. Co., CIVIL ACTION No.: 07-4527, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43654, June 3, 2008, Decided, June 3, 2008, Filed

199.

Jonathan v. Peake, NO. 06-2469, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS, 2008 U.S. App. Vet. Claims LEXIS 666, May 30, 2008, Decided, DESIGNATED FOR ELECTRONIC PUBLISHING ONLY PURSUANT TO U.S. VET. APP. R. 30(a), THIS ACTION MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENT., Reconsideration denied by, Motion denied by Jonathan v. Peake, 2008 U.S. App. Vet. Claims LEXIS 820 (U.S. App. Vet. Cl., July 16, 2008)

200.

Ingalsbe v. Astrue, Civil No. 6:07-cv-06040, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS, HOT SPRINGS DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42994, May 30, 2008, Decided, May 30, 2008, Filed

201.

Johnson v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:06-CV-2851-CAP, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA, ATLANTA DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42944, May 30, 2008, Decided, May 30, 2008, Filed

202.

Lafferty v. Astrue, Case No. 07-3120-CV-S-REL-SSA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DIVISION, 559 F. Supp. 2d 993; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42807, May 30, 2008, Decided, May 30, 2008, Filed

203.

Tritt v. Automatic Data Processing, Inc. Long Term Disability Plan Adm'r, Civil Action No. 3:06 CV 2065 (CFD), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41208, May 27, 2008, Decided

204.

Jiles v. Astrue, CA 07-0718-C, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43725; 131 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 532, May 23, 2008, Decided

205.

Washington v. Astrue, CIVIL ACTION FILE NO. 1:07-CV-1908-AJB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA, ATLANTA DIVISION, 558 F. Supp. 2d 1287; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39833, May 15, 2008, Decided, May 15, 2008, Filed

206.

Kuhn v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-00625, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 551 F. Supp. 2d 413; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36407, May 1, 2008, Decided, May 2, 2008, Filed, Costs and fees proceeding at, Motion granted by Kuhn v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52403 (E.D. Pa., July 8, 2008)

207.

Johnson v. Peake, NO. 07-0146, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS, 2008 U.S. App. Vet. Claims LEXIS 654, April 30, 2008, Decided, DESIGNATED FOR ELECTRONIC PUBLICATION ONLY PURSUANT TO U.S. VET. APP. R. 30(a), THIS ACTION MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENT.

208.

City of Boston v. Bureau of Special Educ. Appeals, CIVIL ACTION NO. 06-11703-RWZ, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39992, April 30, 2008, Decided

209.

Gillem v. Astrue, Civ. No. 06-6184 (WJM), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35351; 130 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 370, April 29, 2008, Decided, April 30, 2008, Filed, NOT FOR PUBLICATION

210.

United States v. Kaminski, Case No. CR 2-02-130, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO, EASTERN DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34597, April 28, 2008, Decided, April 28, 2008, Filed, Stay granted by United States v. Kaminski, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42508 (S.D. Ohio, May 29, 2008)

211.

Laub v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 07 Civ. 9781 (JSR), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 549 F. Supp. 2d 571; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34228, April 25, 2008, Decided, April 29, 2008, Filed

212.

Wells v. Astrue, CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-248-GWU, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY, SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33523, April 23, 2008, Decided, April 23, 2008, Filed

213.

Smitherman v. Astrue, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:07cv259-WC, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29933, April 10, 2008, Decided, April 10, 2008, Filed

214.

Mitchell v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., Case No. CV 05-00810 DDP (RNBx), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29387, April 7, 2008, Decided, April 7, 2008, Filed

215.

Adams v. Astrue, CIVIL ACTION NO. 06-419-JBC, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY, CENTRAL DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25723, March 31, 2008, Decided, March 31, 2008, Filed

216.

Young v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., No. 3:07-cv-100, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26625, March 31, 2008, Filed

217.

DeCoito v. Astrue, 1:07-cv-0330-SEB-TAB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30228, March 31, 2008, Decided, March 31, 2008, Filed

218.

Manns v. Astrue, CAUSE NO. 3:06-CV-54 RM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA, SOUTH BEND DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30256; 129 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 894, March 31, 2008, Decided, March 31, 2008, Filed

219.

Nguyen v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No. CIV S-06-2329-CMK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26274, March 27, 2008, Decided, March 28, 2008, Filed

220.

Marion v. Agere Sys., Inc., Civil Action No. 05-CV-01288, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25863, March 26, 2008, Decided, March 26, 2008, Filed

221.

Mitchell v. Astrue, Civil No. 07-5137, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS, FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24108, March 26, 2008, Decided, March 26, 2008, Filed

222.

Ball v. Astrue, Civil Action No. 1:06-CV-138-BI ECF, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, ABILENE DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24335, March 26, 2008, Decided, March 26, 2008, Filed

223.

Chellino v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan, Inc., No. C 07-03019 CRB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 548 F. Supp. 2d 779; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23902, March 26, 2008, Decided, March 26, 2008, Filed

224.

Brown v. Astrue, CASE NO. 3:06-cv-1055-J-TEM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, JACKSONVILLE DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22861; 129 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 429, March 24, 2008, Decided, March 24, 2008, Filed

225.

Strope v. UNUM Provident Corp., 06-CV-628C(SR), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24075, March 21, 2008, Decided, March 26, 2008, Filed

226.

Buffin v. Astrue, CASE NO. 3:05-cv-01289-J-TEM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, JACKSONVILLE DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21985, March 20, 2008, Decided, March 20, 2008, Filed

227.

Hicks v. Astrue, Civil Case No. 1:06CV00067 HLJ, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS, NORTHERN DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40047, March 19, 2008, Decided, March 19, 2008, Filed

228.

Torrez v. Astrue, CIV 06-1178-PHX-MHB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21435, March 18, 2008, Decided, March 18, 2008, Filed

229.

Santer v. Teachers Ins. & Annuity Ass'n, CIVIL ACTION NO. 06-CV-1863, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21767, March 18, 2008, Decided, March 19, 2008, Filed, Motion denied by Santer v. Teachers Ins. & Annuity Ass'n, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23364 (E.D. Pa., Mar. 24, 2008)

230.

McGinnis v. Astrue, 8:07CV276, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20865, March 17, 2008, Decided, March 17, 2008, Filed

231.

Roop v. Astrue, Civil Action No. 7:07cv00214, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ROANOKE DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22254, March 17, 2008, Decided

232.

Lamanna v. Special Agents Mut. Benefits Ass'n, Civil Action No. 07-733, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 546 F. Supp. 2d 261; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17977, March 6, 2008, Decided, March 6, 2008, Filed

233.

Wright v. Astrue, Case No. 06-CV-6014 (FB), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16938, March 4, 2008, Decided, March 5, 2008, Filed

234.

Nickel v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., Case Number 06-10476-BC, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN, NORTHERN DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16777; 43 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2368, March 3, 2008, Decided, March 3, 2008, Filed

235.

Hinton v. City College of N.Y., 05 Civ. 8951 (GEL), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16058, February 29, 2008, Decided, February 29, 2008, Filed

236.

Yunt v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No. CIV S-06-1779-CMK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16220; 128 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 1067, February 29, 2008, Decided, March 3, 2008, Filed

237.

May v. Astrue, Case No. 5:07cv00007, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, HARRISONBURG DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14204, February 26, 2008, Decided, February 26, 2008, Filed

238.

Creel v. Wachovia Corp., Case No. 8:07-cv-248-T-24 MAP, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, TAMPA DIVISION, 543 F. Supp. 2d 1298; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14248; 43 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2446, February 25, 2008, Decided, February 25, 2008, Filed

239.

Deleonardis v. Astrue, Civil Action No. 5:07CV00050, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, HARRISONBURG DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15580, February 22, 2008, Entered

240.

Enkababian v. Astrue, CASE No. 8:06-CV-1231-T-TGW, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, TAMPA DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13274, February 21, 2008, Decided, February 22, 2008, Filed

241.

Harris v. Astrue, Case No. 5:07cv44/RS/EMT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, PANAMA CITY DIVISION, 546 F. Supp. 2d 1267; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15888, February 19, 2008, Decided, February 19, 2008, Filed, Adopted by, Remanded by Harris v. Astrue, 546 F. Supp. 2d 1267, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15885 (N.D. Fla., Feb. 29, 2008)

242.

Bohovich v. Astrue, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:06-CV-1710, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10828; 127 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 321, February 13, 2008, Decided, February 13, 2008, Filed, Request granted, in part, Request denied by, in part, Costs and fees proceeding at Bohovich v. Astrue, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56798 (M.D. Pa., July 24, 2008)

243.

Gomez v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., Case No. 6:06-CV-1593-ORL-KRS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, ORLANDO DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9792; 127 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 508, February 11, 2008, Decided, February 11, 2008, Filed

244.

Smith v. Peake, NO. 06-0493, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS, 2008 U.S. App. Vet. Claims LEXIS 122, February 6, 2008, Decided, DESIGNATED FOR ELECTRONIC PUBLICATION ONLY PURSUANT TO U.S. VET. APP. R. 30(a), THIS ACTION MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENT.

245.

Cates-Wyles v. Astrue, 4:06CV01514 SWW/JTR, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS, LITTLE ROCK DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58486; 128 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 252, February 6, 2008, Decided, February 6, 2008, Filed, Adopted by, Approved by, Remanded by, Judgment entered by Cates-Wyles v. Astrue, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14617 (E.D. Ark., 2008)

246.

Hardt v. Astrue, No. CIV 05-494-TUC-CKJ, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9355; 127 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 935, February 6, 2008, Decided, February 7, 2008, Filed

247.

Robinson v. Astrue, No. 4:06CV01547-BD, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS, WESTERN DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7808; 126 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 284, February 1, 2008, Decided, February 1, 2008, Filed

248.

Eastman v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., Civil File No. 06-4123 (MJD/RLE), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6720, January 29, 2008, Decided, January 29, 2008, Filed

249.

Ramey v. Astrue, CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-54-GWU, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY, SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4828; 126 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 823, January 23, 2008, Decided, January 23, 2008, Filed

250.

Fitzpatrick v. Bayer Corp., No 04 Civ. 5134 (RJS), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3532, January 17, 2008, Decided, January 17, 2008, Filed

251.

Myers v. Astrue, Case No. 06-4056, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1912, January 10, 2008, Decided, January 10, 2008, Filed

252.

Dickson v. Astrue, Case No. 5:06cv214/RS/EMT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, PANAMA CITY DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51924; 127 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 4517, January 10, 2008, Decided, January 10, 2008, Filed, Adopted by, Reversed by, Remanded by Dickson v. Astrue, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9869 (N.D. Fla., 2008)

253.

Parisi v. UNUMProvident Corp., No. 3:03CV01425 (DJS), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93472, December 21, 2007, Decided

254.

Sweeney v. Aetna US Healthcare, Case No. 4:04-cv-449, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, SHERMAN DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92737, December 17, 2007, Decided, December 18, 2007, Filed, Remanded by Sweeney v. Aetna United States Healthcare, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 14773 (5th Cir. Tex., July 10, 2008)

255.

Welch v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., CASE NO. 00-1439-DWB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91796; 43 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1097, December 13, 2007, Decided, December 13, 2007, Filed

256.

Light v. Jack's Diving Locker, Civ. No. 05-00706 BMK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90841, December 11, 2007, Decided, December 11, 2007, Filed

257.

Young v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., CIVIL ACTION NO. 06-1570, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90920, December 10, 2007, Decided, December 11, 2007, Filed

258.

Gill v. N. Greene Unit Sch. Dist. No. 3, No. 06-3157, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, SPRINGFIELD DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89397, December 5, 2007, Decided, December 5, 2007, Filed

259.

Mitchell v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., Case No. CV 05-00810 DDP (RNBx), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 523 F. Supp. 2d 1132; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90612, December 3, 2007, Decided, December 3, 2007, Filed, Costs and fees proceeding at, Motion granted by Mitchell v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29387 (C.D. Cal., Apr. 7, 2008)

260.

Schnall v. Astrue, No. CV-07-617-PCT-DGC, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89678, November 30, 2007, Decided, December 3, 2007, Filed

261.

Fabian v. Astrue, NO. 3:05CV775 (VLB) (TPS), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83586, November 13, 2007, Decided

262.

McEvers v. Astrue, 1:06-cv-36 RWP-TJS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA, WESTERN DIVISION, 518 F. Supp. 2d 1071; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81680; 125 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 53, October 31, 2007, Decided, October 31, 2007, Filed

263.

Beaver v. Astrue, Civil Action No. 7:06-CV-00651, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ROANOKE DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79403; 123 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 513, October 24, 2007, Decided

264.

Klotz v. Xerox Corp., 07 Civ. 1734 (GEL), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 519 F. Supp. 2d 430; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78334, October 22, 2007, Decided, October 22, 2007, Filed

265.

Ayoub v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., Case No. 07-CV-13158, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN, SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77727, October 19, 2007, Decided, October 19, 2007, Filed

266.

Volynskaya v. Epicentric, Inc. Health & Welfare Plan, No. C 04-0839 SI, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81208, October 16, 2007, Decided, October 16, 2007, Filed

267.

Michaels v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc'y of the United States Emples., Managers, & Agents Long-Term Disability Plan, CIVIL ACTION NO. 04-CV-3250, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77060, October 15, 2007, Decided, October 16, 2007, Filed

268.

Brown v. E. Me. Med. Ctr., CIVIL NO. 06-60-P-H, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE, 514 F. Supp. 2d 104; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76967, October 15, 2007, Decided, October 15, 2007, Filed

269.

Proskel v. Snap-On Disability Income Program for Exempt Emples., 1:06cv1830 AWI DLB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77398, October 9, 2007, Decided, October 9, 2007, Filed

270.

Ruff v. Astrue, CIVIL ACTION No. 07-2014-JWL-JTR, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS, 523 F. Supp. 2d 1232; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79101, October 3, 2007, Decided, October 3, 2007, Filed, Adopted by, Remanded by Ruff v. Astrue, 523 F. Supp. 2d 1232, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79100 (D. Kan., Oct. 24, 2007)

271.

Ayoub v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., Case No. 07-CV-13158, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN, SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72471, September 28, 2007, Decided, September 28, 2007, Filed, Sanctions disallowed by Ayoub v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77727 ( E.D. Mich., Oct. 19, 2007)

272.

Earnest v. Barnhart, NO. 1:06-CV-00714-JDT-TAB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA, INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74529; 123 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 301, September 28, 2007, Decided, NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION IN PRINT

273.

Jagielski v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 06cv1081, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72828, September 28, 2007, Decided, September 28, 2007, Filed

274.

Fay v. Barnhart, 1:06-CV-01262-JDT-TAB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA, INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74528; 123 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 374, September 27, 2007, Decided, NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION IN PRINT

275.

Phelps v. Siemens Long-Term Disability Plan, Case No. 3:04cv068, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO, WESTERN DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70714; 42 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2137, September 24, 2007, Decided, September 24, 2007, Filed

276.

Robbins v. Am. Preferred Mgmt. Co., FILE NO. 5:05-CV-182, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN, SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68569, September 17, 2007, Decided, September 17, 2007, Filed, Costs and fees proceeding at Robbins v. Am. Preferred Mgmt. Co., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32645 (W.D. Mich., Apr. 21, 2008)

277.

Rudzinski v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., Case No. 05 C 0474, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69258, September 14, 2007, Decided, September 14, 2007, Filed, Motion to strike granted by, in part, Motion to strike denied by, in part, Sanctions disallowed by Rudzinski v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75668 (N.D. Ill., Oct. 4, 2007)

278.

Buckley v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 3:05-cv-564 HTW-LRA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI, JACKSON DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67305, September 11, 2007, Decided, September 11, 2007, Filed

279.

Moorefield v. Astrue, CASE NO. 4:07CV00006, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, DANVILLE DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67442, September 11, 2007, Decided

280.

Vo v. Astrue, C.A. No.: 9:06-1624-PMD-GCK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA, BEAUFORT DIVISION, 518 F. Supp. 2d 715; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95638; 125 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 127, September 5, 2007, Decided

281.

Servat v. Am. Heritage Life Ins. Co., CIVIL ACTION NO. 04-2928 SECTION "N" (2), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63817, August 28, 2007, Decided, August 28, 2007, Filed

282.

Slocum v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., Case No. 06-1143-JTM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63746, August 28, 2007, Decided, August 28, 2007, Filed

283.

Jagielski v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 06cv1081, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62660; 42 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1725, August 24, 2007, Decided, August 24, 2007, Filed, Costs and fees proceeding at, Motion granted by Jagielski v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72828 (W.D. Pa., Sept. 28, 2007)Opinion withdrawn by, Vacated by Jagielski v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36254 (W.D. Pa., Apr. 29, 2008)

284.

Vaswani v. Barnhart, 05 Civ. 8539 (DLC), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62493; 122 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 200, August 23, 2007, Decided, August 27, 2007, Filed

285.

Rife v. Astrue, Civil Action No. 1:06cv00101, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ABINGDON DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56008; 121 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 298, July 31, 2007, Decided

286.

Kerns v. Nicholson, NO. 05-3335, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS, 2007 U.S. App. Vet. Claims LEXIS 1194, July 26, 2007, Decided, DESIGNATED FOR ELECTRONIC PUBLISHING ONLY PURSUANT TO U.S. VET. APP. R. 30(a), THIS ACTION MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENT.

287.

Klett v. Int'l Cruise Mgmt. Agency A/S, CIVIL NO. 06-00400 SOM-LEK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49922, July 10, 2007, Decided, July 10, 2007, Filed

288.

Young v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., CIVIL ACTION NO. 06-1570, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94242, July 3, 2007, Decided, July 3, 2007, Filed, Adopted by Young v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90920 (W.D. La., Dec. 10, 2007)

289.

Lunt v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., Case No. 2:05-cv-784 TC, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47967, June 29, 2007, Decided, July 2, 2007, Filed

290.

Whealen v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., CASE NO. CV 06-4948 PSG (PLAx), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51335, June 29, 2007, Decided, June 28, 2007, Filed

291.

Gibson v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-CV-3814-LDD, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47337, June 27, 2007, Decided, June 29, 2007, Filed

292.

Suriano v. Astrue, CIVIL ACTION, NO. 06-3615, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45975; 120 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 669, June 25, 2007, Decided

293.

Emery v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., CIVIL NO. 06-91-P-H , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE, 489 F. Supp. 2d 121; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43248, June 13, 2007, Decided , June 13, 2007, Filed

294.

Kemp v. Metro-North R.R., 04 Civ. 9926 (RWS) , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43568; 19 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1489, June 12, 2007, Decided , June 14, 2007, Filed

295.

Lee v. Aetna Life & Cas. Ins. Co., 05 CIV. 2960 (PAC) , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38205; 40 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2755, May 24, 2007, Decided , May 24, 2007, Filed

296.

Mills v. Barnhart, Civil Action No. 7:06cv00430 , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ROANOKE DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38481; 120 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 491, May 23, 2007, Decided

297.

Manning v. Johnson & Johnson Pension Comm., Case No. 3:05-cv-848-J-32TEM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, JACKSONVILLE DIVISION, 504 F. Supp. 2d 1293; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62295, May 16, 2007, Decided, May 16, 2007, Filed

298.

Batten v. Barnhart, Civil Action No. 7:03cv720 , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ROANOKE DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34147, May 8, 2007, Decided

299.

Gass v. Marriott Hotel Servs., File No. 1:05-CV-856 , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN, SOUTHERN DIVISION, 501 F. Supp. 2d 1011; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33580, May 7, 2007, Decided , May 8, 2007, Filed , Reconsideration denied by Gass v. Marriott Hotel Servs., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37769 (W.D. Mich., May 23, 2007)Costs and fees proceeding at Gass v. Marriott Hotel Servs., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58525 (W.D. Mich., Aug. 10, 2007)

300.

Doty v. Sun Life Assur. Co. of Can., CIVIL ACTION NO. H-06-1869 , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, HOUSTON DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31126, April 27, 2007, Decided , April 27, 2007, Filed , Vacated by, Motion granted by, Dismissed by Doty v. Sun Life Assur. Co., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73959 (S.D. Tex., Oct. 2, 2007)

301.

Hernandez v. SBC Communs., Inc., EP-05-CA-0472-KC , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, EL PASO DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33153, April 25, 2007, Decided , April 25, 2007, Filed , Affirmed by Hernandez v. SBC Communs., Inc., 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 2888 (5th Cir. Tex., Feb. 8, 2008)

302.

Barrager v. Astrue, Case No. 06-1150-WEB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60850; 122 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 273, April 23, 2007, Decided, April 23, 2007, Filed, Adopted by, Remanded by, Judgment entered by Barrager v. Astrue, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60855 (D. Kan., Aug. 13, 2007)

303.

Brooks v. Neb. By-Products, Inc., 8:06CV309 , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28132; 41 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2009, April 13, 2007, Decided

304.

Cohen v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., No. 00 Civ. 6112 (LTS)(FM) , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 485 F. Supp. 2d 339; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26777, April 11, 2007, Decided , April 10, 2007, Filed , Stay denied by, Costs and fees proceeding at, Motion granted by Cohen v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86099 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 21, 2007)

305.

Ayoub v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., Case No. 06-CV-15768-DT , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN, SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29556, April 6, 2007, Decided , April 6, 2007, Filed , Related proceeding at Ayoub v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72471 ( E.D. Mich., Sept. 28, 2007)

306.

Olson v. Nicholson, NO. 04-0800 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS, 2007 U.S. App. Vet. Claims LEXIS 556, March 30, 2007, Decided , DESIGNATED FOR ELECTRONIC PUBLICATION ONLY PURSUANT TO U.S. VET. APP. R. 30(a), THIS ACTION MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENT.

307.

Shalett v. Nicholson, NO. 04-1564 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS, 2007 U.S. App. Vet. Claims LEXIS 499, March 23, 2007, Decided , DESIGNATED FOR ELECTRONIC PUBLICATION ONLY PURSUANT TO U.S. VET. APP. R. 30(a), THIS ACTION MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENT.

308.

Linich v. Broadspire Servs., No. CV 05-2983-PHX-MHM , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19295, March 15, 2007, Decided , March 16, 2007, Filed

309.

Klinger v. Verizon Communs., Inc., CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-CV-5312 , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18563, March 14, 2007, Decided , March 16, 2007, Filed

310.

Rose v. Cont'l Cas. Co., Civil Action No. 5:06-151-JMH , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY, CENTRAL DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21576, March 8, 2007, Decided , March 8, 2007, Filed , Affirmed by Rose v. Hartford Fin. Servs. Group, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 5742 (6th Cir.) (6th Cir. Ky., 2008)

311.

Huffaker v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., Case No. 3:05-CV-527 , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16730, March 8, 2007, Decided , Affirmed by Huffaker v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 6576 (6th Cir.) (6th Cir. Tenn., 2008)

312.

Music v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:05-CV-1223 , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21398, March 7, 2007, Decided , March 7, 2007, Filed , Motion granted by, in part, Motion denied by, in part, Costs and fees proceeding at, Judgment entered by Music v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77771 (M.D. Pa., Oct. 19, 2007)

313.

Davidow v. Astrue, 06-CV-6253 CJS , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35191; 120 Soc. Sec. Rep. Service 123, March 2, 2007, Decided

314.

Gembus v. Metrohealth Sys., CASE NO: 1:06-cv-00523 , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO, EASTERN DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13327, February 26, 2007, Decided , February 27, 2007, Filed , Affirmed by Gembus v. MetroHealth Sys., 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 18554 (6th Cir.) (6th Cir. Ohio, 2008)

315.

Joeckel v. Nicholson, No. 05-2364 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS, 2007 U.S. App. Vet. Claims LEXIS 337, February 23, 2007, Decided , DESIGNATED FOR ELECTRONIC PUBLICATION ONLY PURSUANT TO U.S. VET. APP. R. 30(a), THIS ACTION MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENT.

316.

Glover v. Jefferson Pilot Fin. Ins. Co., CASE NO. 4:06-CV-323 GTE , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS, WESTERN DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12079, February 21, 2007, Decided , February 21, 2007, Filed

317.

Branch v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., CASE NO. 4:05-CV-69 (CDL) , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA, COLUMBUS DIVISION, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11190, February 16, 2007, Decided , February 16, 2007, Filed