ROSSMAN v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 1:14cv650. (2015)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20150910d84
Visitors: 33
Filed: Sep. 09, 2015
Latest Update: Sep. 09, 2015
Summary: ORDER SUSAN J. DLOTT , District Judge . This matter is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on July 22, 2015 a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 10). Subsequently, the plaintiff filed objections to such Report and Recommendation (Doc.
Summary: ORDER SUSAN J. DLOTT , District Judge . This matter is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on July 22, 2015 a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 10). Subsequently, the plaintiff filed objections to such Report and Recommendation (Doc. ..
More
ORDER
SUSAN J. DLOTT, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on July 22, 2015 a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 10). Subsequently, the plaintiff filed objections to such Report and Recommendation (Doc. 11), defendants filed a response to the objections (Doc. 12) and plaintiff's filed a supplemental memorandum (Doc. 13).
The Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does determine that such Recommendation should be adopted.
Accordingly, the decision of the Commissioner to deny Plaintiff Disability Insurance Benefits is AFFIRMED. This case is hereby TERMINATED from the docket of this Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
