Peck v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
29
ORDER DENYING Claimant's Appeal From the Administrative Decision of the Commissioner of Social Security signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 3/26/2019. CASE CLOSED. (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
9
Plaintiff,
10
11
12
13
Case No. 1:17-cv-01060-JDP
DONNA PECK,
ORDER ON SOCIAL SECURITY APPEAL
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
This matter is before the court on claimant’s request for judicial review of an unfavorable
decision of the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration regarding his
application for a period of disability and Social Security Disability Insurance Benefits. The
parties have consented to entry of final judgment by the U.S. Magistrate Judge under the
provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), with any appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit. ECF Nos. 8, 10. At a hearing on March 25, 2019, we heard argument from the parties.
Having reviewed the record, administrative transcript, briefs of the parties, and applicable law,
and having considered arguments made at the hearing, we find that the ALJ’s decision is
supported by substantial evidence in the record and is based on proper legal standards.
For the reasons stated on the record at oral argument, we deny claimant’s appeal from the
administrative decision of the Commissioner of Social Security. The clerk of court is directed to
enter judgment in favor of defendant Nancy A. Berryhill, the Acting Commissioner of Social
Security, and against claimant Donna Peck. The clerk of the court is directed to close this case.
28
1
1
2
3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
4
5
Dated:
March 26, 2019
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
6
7
8
No. 200.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?