RENFRO v. ASTRUE, CIV-11-223-F. (2012)
Court: District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
Number: infdco20120215996
Visitors: 7
Filed: Feb. 14, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 14, 2012
Summary: ORDER STEPHEN P. FRIOT, District Judge. Plaintiff Shirley A. Renfro brings this action seeking judicial review of a decision by the Social Security Administration denying her applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income benefits. Magistrate Judge Valerie K. Couch issued a Report and Recommendation in this matter on January 17, 2012 (doc. no. 17), recommending that the Commissioner's decision be reversed and that the matter be remanded for further proceeding
Summary: ORDER STEPHEN P. FRIOT, District Judge. Plaintiff Shirley A. Renfro brings this action seeking judicial review of a decision by the Social Security Administration denying her applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income benefits. Magistrate Judge Valerie K. Couch issued a Report and Recommendation in this matter on January 17, 2012 (doc. no. 17), recommending that the Commissioner's decision be reversed and that the matter be remanded for further proceedings..
More
ORDER
STEPHEN P. FRIOT, District Judge.
Plaintiff Shirley A. Renfro brings this action seeking judicial review of a decision by the Social Security Administration denying her applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income benefits.
Magistrate Judge Valerie K. Couch issued a Report and Recommendation in this matter on January 17, 2012 (doc. no. 17), recommending that the Commissioner's decision be reversed and that the matter be remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation. The Magistrate Judge's Report advised the parties of their right to object to the Report and Recommendation by February 7, 2012. The Report also advised that failure to make timely objection to the Report waives the right to appellate review of factual and legal issues contained in the Report. 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.
Accordingly, the court ACCEPTS, AFFIRMS, and ADOPTS the findings and recommendations of Magistrate Judge Couch as stated in the Report and Recommendation. The Commissioner's decision denying benefits is hereby REVERSED and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation.
Source: Leagle