Crawford v. Astrue

Filing 32

ORDER -....IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge is sustained, adopted and incorporated herein [Doc. 31] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner denying plaint iff's application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 USC §§401, et seq is AFFIRMED. An appropriate judgment will accompany this order.. Signed by District Judge Charles A. Shaw on 8/13/2013. (MRC)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI NORTHERN DIVISION VONNA K. CRAWFORD, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 2:12-CV-52 CAS ORDER This matter is before the Court pursuant to the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas C. Mummert, III filed July 18, 2013. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The Magistrate Judge recommended that the decision of the Commissioner denying plaintiff’s application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401, et seq., be affirmed. Neither party has filed an objection to the recommendation and the time to do so has passed. After careful review of the matter, the Court concurs with the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in the thorough Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge is sustained, adopted and incorporated herein. [Doc. 31] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner denying plaintiff’s application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401, et seq., is AFFIRMED. An appropriate judgment will accompany this order. __________________________________ CHARLES A. SHAW UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated this 13th day of August, 2013. 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?