SANDERS v. COLVIN, CIV-13-1123-F. (2014)
Court: District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
Number: infdco20140825a57
Visitors: 7
Filed: Aug. 22, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 22, 2014
Summary: ORDER STEPHEN P. FRIOT, District Judge. Plaintiff Lavinia Sanders brings this action seeking judicial review pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405(g) of the final decision of the defendant Commissioner denying plaintiff's applications for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. Magistrate Judge Gary M. Purcell issued a Report and Recommendation on August 1, 2014, doc. no. 14 (the Report), recommending that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed. The Report advised the p
Summary: ORDER STEPHEN P. FRIOT, District Judge. Plaintiff Lavinia Sanders brings this action seeking judicial review pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405(g) of the final decision of the defendant Commissioner denying plaintiff's applications for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. Magistrate Judge Gary M. Purcell issued a Report and Recommendation on August 1, 2014, doc. no. 14 (the Report), recommending that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed. The Report advised the pa..
More
ORDER
STEPHEN P. FRIOT, District Judge.
Plaintiff Lavinia Sanders brings this action seeking judicial review pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §405(g) of the final decision of the defendant Commissioner denying plaintiff's applications for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. Magistrate Judge Gary M. Purcell issued a Report and Recommendation on August 1, 2014, doc. no. 14 (the Report), recommending that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed. The Report advised the parties of their right to file written objections to the Report and Recommendation by August 21, 2014. The Report also advised that failure to make timely objection to the Report waives appellate review of the recommended ruling. Neither party has filed an objection to the Report, and neither party has requested an extension of time within which to file any objection to the Report.
With no objection being filed, and having reviewed the Report, the record, and the relevant arguments and authorities, the court finds that no purpose would be served by setting out any further analysis here and that the Report should be adopted in its entirety.
The court ACCEPTS, AFFIRMS, and ADOPTS the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge as stated in the Report. The Commissioner's decision denying benefits is AFFIRMED.
Source: Leagle
