Budo v. Social Security Administration

Filing 18

ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge 16 is SUSTAINED, ADOPTED, AND INCORPORATED herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED, and Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. A separate Judgment will accompany this Order. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 3/21/13. (LGK)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION RAYMOND P. BUDO, JR., Plaintiff, vs. CAROLYN COLVIN, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.1 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 4:12CV187 JAR ORDER This matter arises on the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Terry I. Adelman, filed March 5, 2013. See 28 U.S.C. §636. In his report, Magistrate Judge Adelman recommends that the Court affirm the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, and dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint with prejudice. Plaintiff was granted until March 19, 2013 to file written objections to the Report and Recommendation, but to date has filed no objections. Upon careful consideration of the Report and Recommendation and the record in this case, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge [16] is SUSTAINED, ADOPTED, AND INCORPORATED herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED, and Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. A separate Judgment will accompany this Order. 1 Carolyn W. Colvin became the Acting Commissioner of Social Security on February 14, 2013. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Carolyn W. Colvin is substituted for Michael J. Astrue as the defendant in this suit. No further action need be taken to continue this suit by reason of the last sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Dated this 21st day of March, 2013. JOHN A. ROSS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -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?