Davidson v. Berryhill, CIV-17-1258-HE. (2018)
Court: District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
Number: infdco20180821803
Visitors: 4
Filed: Aug. 14, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 14, 2018
Summary: ORDER JOE HEATON , Chief District Judge . Plaintiff Angela Davidson filed this case seeking judicial review of the Social Security Administration's determination that she is not disabled under the Social Security Act. The matter was referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge Gary Purcell for initial proceedings consistent with 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B), (b)(3), and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). Judge Purcell has submitted a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed.
Summary: ORDER JOE HEATON , Chief District Judge . Plaintiff Angela Davidson filed this case seeking judicial review of the Social Security Administration's determination that she is not disabled under the Social Security Act. The matter was referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge Gary Purcell for initial proceedings consistent with 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B), (b)(3), and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). Judge Purcell has submitted a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed. T..
More
ORDER
JOE HEATON, Chief District Judge.
Plaintiff Angela Davidson filed this case seeking judicial review of the Social Security Administration's determination that she is not disabled under the Social Security Act. The matter was referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge Gary Purcell for initial proceedings consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), (b)(3), and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). Judge Purcell has submitted a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed.
The parties were advised of their right to file an objection to the Report. Plaintiff has filed an objection to the Report, triggering de novo review by the court as to the issues as to which objection is made. The background of proceedings is set forth in the Report and need not be repeated here.
Plaintiff's objections to the Report are perfunctory, essentially limited to repeating the arguments included in her prior briefs. Notwithstanding the limited additional discussion, the court has conducted the necessary de novo review of the matters to which objection has been made and concludes, for substantially the reasons stated by Judge Purcell, that the Report [Doc. #21] should be and is ADOPTED. The judgment of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
