Seko v. Colvin
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation dated January 19, 2017 20 is adopted in its entirety. A separate Judgment in accordance with this Memorandum and Order is entered this same date. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 2/7/17. (CAR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
JOHN JUDE SEKO,
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,1
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Case No. 4:15CV1669 RWS
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Court referred this matter to United States Magistrate Judge Shirley P.
Mensah for a report and recommendation on all dispositive matters pursuant to 28
U.S.C. ' 636(b). On January 19, 2017, Judge Mensah filed her recommendation
that the decision of the Commissioner denying plaintiff=s application for disability
insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act be affirmed. No
objections to Judge Mensah’s Report and Recommendation were filed, and the time
for filing objections or for seeking an extension of time to do so has expired.
1 Nancy A. Berryhill is now the Acting Commissioner of Social Security. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Nancy A. Berryhill should be substituted for Acting Commissioner
Carolyn W. Colvin as the defendant in this suit. No further action needs to be taken to continue this suit
by reason of the last sentence of section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
After careful consideration, the Court will adopt and sustain the thorough
reasoning of Magistrate Judge Mensah set forth in the Report and Recommendation
of January 19, 2017.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation dated
January 19, 2017  is adopted in its entirety.
A separate Judgment in accordance with this Memorandum and Order is
entered this same date.
RODNEY W. SIPPEL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 7th day of February, 2017.
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?