Dang v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
19
ORDER Signed by Judge David J. Hale on 9/9/2020: The Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Regina S. Edwards DN 18 are ADOPTED in full and INCORPORATED by reference herein. A separate judgment will be entered this date. cc: Counsel (JM)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
LOUISVILLE DIVISION
TONY V. DANG,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action No. 3:19-cv-737-DJH-RSE
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
* * * * *
ORDER
Plaintiff Tony V. Dang filed this action seeking review of the decision by Defendant
Commissioner of Social Security to deny Dang’s application for disability insurance and
supplemental security income benefits. (Docket No. 1) The case was referred to Magistrate Judge
Regina S. Edwards for report and recommendation. Judge Edwards issued her Findings of Fact,
Conclusions of Law and Recommendation on August 25, 2020, recommending that the
Commissioner’s decision be affirmed. (D.N. 18) The time for objections to the magistrate judge’s
recommendation has now run, with no objections filed. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R.
Civ. P. 72(b)(2).
Because no party has objected to the report and recommendation, the Court may adopt it
without review. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Nevertheless, the Court has
conducted its own review of the record and finds no error in the magistrate judge’s conclusions.
Accordingly, and the Court being otherwise sufficiently advised, it is hereby
ORDERED as follows:
(1)
The Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommendation of Magistrate
Judge Regina S. Edwards (D.N. 18) are ADOPTED in full and INCORPORATED by reference
herein.
(2)
A separate judgment will be entered this date.
September 9, 2020
David J. Hale, Judge
United States District Court
1
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?