GAUSE v. COLVIN

Filing 31

ORDER ADOPTING 29 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Decision of the Commissioner, denying benefits, is AFFIRMED. Signed by SENIOR JUDGE MAURICE M PAUL on 9/29/2014. (jws)

Download PDF
Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION TONI GAUSE, Plaintiff, v. CASE NO. 1:13-cv-00157-MP-GRJ CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Defendant. _____________________________/ ORDER This cause comes on for consideration upon the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation dated June 19, 2014. (Doc. 29). The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). Plaintiff has filed objections at Doc. 30. I have made a de novo review based on those objections. Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the timely filed objections, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted. Contrary to Plaintiff’s contention, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) did not justify the denial of benefits using conclusory, boilerplate language. Instead, as explained in the Report and Recommendation, the ALJ made detailed findings of fact supported by substantial evidence, and properly articulated explicit and adequate reasons for his credibility findings. See Foote v. Chater, 67 F.3d 1553, 1561–62 (11th Cir. 1995). Page 2 of 2 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: 1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 29) is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order. 2. The decision of the Commissioner, denying benefits, is AFFIRMED. DONE AND ORDERED this 29th day of September, 2014 s/Maurice M. Paul Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge Case No: 1:13-cv-00157-MP-GRJ

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?