Ramic v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
16
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge is SUSTAINED, ADOPTED, and INCORPORATED herein, and the decision of the Commissioner in this case is AFFIRMED.A separate Judgment shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.. Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 2/2/15. (JWJ)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
RASIDA RAMIC,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 4:13CV2442 AGF-TIA
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Currently before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge Terry I. Adelman, to whom this matter was referred for recommended
disposition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). On January 13, 2015, Magistrate Judge
Adelman filed his Report and Recommendation, recommending that the Court affirm the
decision of the Commissioner to deny Plaintiff supplemental security income under Title
XVI of the Social Security Act and disability insurance benefits under Title II of the
Social Security Act. Neither party has filed objections to the Report and
Recommendation and the time to do so has passed.
Upon careful consideration of the Report and Recommendation and the record in
this case, the Court concurs with the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that the
Commissioner’s decision in this matter should be affirmed.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United
States Magistrate Judge is SUSTAINED, ADOPTED, and INCORPORATED herein,
and the decision of the Commissioner in this case is AFFIRMED.
A separate Judgment shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.
_______________________________
AUDREY G. FLEISSIG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 2nd day of February, 2015.
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?