Castillo v. Berryhill, 2:16-cv-572. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Utah
Number: infdco20180319415
Visitors: 1
Filed: Mar. 09, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 09, 2018
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CLARK WADDOUPS , District Judge . This case was assigned to United States District Court Judge Clark Waddoups, who then referred it to United States Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B). (ECF. No. 13). On January 30, 2018, Judge Wells issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that the court affirm the decision of the Commissioner. 1 ( See ECF No. 22.) Ms. Castillo did not file an objection. The court has review
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CLARK WADDOUPS , District Judge . This case was assigned to United States District Court Judge Clark Waddoups, who then referred it to United States Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B). (ECF. No. 13). On January 30, 2018, Judge Wells issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that the court affirm the decision of the Commissioner. 1 ( See ECF No. 22.) Ms. Castillo did not file an objection. The court has reviewe..
More
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
CLARK WADDOUPS, District Judge.
This case was assigned to United States District Court Judge Clark Waddoups, who then referred it to United States Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). (ECF. No. 13). On January 30, 2018, Judge Wells issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that the court affirm the decision of the Commissioner.1 (See ECF No. 22.) Ms. Castillo did not file an objection.
The court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation de novo and APPROVES AND ADOPTS it in its entirety. The Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED.
SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. The Magistrate Court recommended that the "ALJ's decision be AFFIRMED." (ECF No. 22 at 7.) To be precise, as the Magistrate Court correctly noted, "the ALJ's decision is considered the Commissioner's final decision" because "the Appeals Council denied the claimant's requested review." (ECF No. 22 at 7.)
Source: Leagle
