Anderson v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
17
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 15 Report and Recommendations and granting 13 Motion to Affirm filed by SSA General Counsel, Commissioner of Social Security. Signed by Chief District Judge Daniel P. Jordan, III on 08/20/18 (KNS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
NORTHERN DIVISION
SHARON NEWMAN ANDERSON
PLAINTIFF
V.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-363-DPJ-JCG
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
DEFENDANT
ORDER
This case is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) entered by
United States Magistrate Judge John C. Gargiulo. R&R [15]. On December 22, 2017, Social
Security Commissioner Nancy Berryhill (“Commissioner”) moved for an order affirming the
commissioner’s decision. Def.’s Mot. [13]. On July 25, 2018, Judge Gargiulo recommended
that the Commissioner’s motion be granted, finding that the Commissioner applied the correct
legal standards and that the decision was supported by substantial evidence. See R&R [15] at 1–
2. Additionally, Judge Garguilo noted that Anderson had failed to submit any “new, material
evidence that warrants remand.” Id. at 2. Anderson failed to respond in opposition to the R&R,
and the time to do so has now expired.
The Court, having fully reviewed the unopposed R&R of the United States Magistrate
Judge, and being advised in the premises, finds that the R&R [15] should be adopted as the
opinion of this Court.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the R&R [15] of United States Magistrate John C.
Gargiulo be, and the same is hereby, adopted as the finding of this Court. The Motion to Affirm
[13] is granted. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 58.
SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the 20th day of August, 2018.
s/ Daniel P. Jordan III
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?