BUKACEK v. COLVIN, CIV-13-1058-HE. (2014)
Court: District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
Number: infdco20141107a98
Visitors: 17
Filed: Nov. 06, 2014
Latest Update: Nov. 06, 2014
Summary: ORDER JOE HEATON, District Judge. Plaintiff Larry A. Bukacek, filed this action seeking judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying his application for disability insurance benefits. Consistent with 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B), the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Gary M. Purcell, who recommends that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed. Plaintiff filed his application for disability benefits in February 2011. The Administrativ
Summary: ORDER JOE HEATON, District Judge. Plaintiff Larry A. Bukacek, filed this action seeking judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying his application for disability insurance benefits. Consistent with 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B), the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Gary M. Purcell, who recommends that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed. Plaintiff filed his application for disability benefits in February 2011. The Administrative..
More
ORDER
JOE HEATON, District Judge.
Plaintiff Larry A. Bukacek, filed this action seeking judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying his application for disability insurance benefits. Consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Gary M. Purcell, who recommends that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed.
Plaintiff filed his application for disability benefits in February 2011. The Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") issued a decision on May 22, 2012, determining that plaintiff was not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act. The Appeals Council denied plaintiff's request for review, so the ALJ's decision became the final decision of the Commissioner.
Plaintiff failed to object to the Report and Recommendation and thereby waived his right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues it addressed. United States v. One Parcel of Real Property, 73 F.3d 1057, 1059-60 (10th Cir. 1996). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Accordingly, the court adopts Magistrate Judge Purcell's Report and Recommendation. The Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
