Greeson v. Colvin

Filing 19

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 18 Report and Recommendation. The decision of the Commissioner denying Plaintiff's application for benefits is affirmed. Signed by Honorable Timothy D. DeGiusti on 7/15/14. (cla)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA JOEL GREESON, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. CIV-13-329-D ORDER Plaintiff brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §405(g) for review of the Defendant Commissioner of the Social Security Administration’s final decision denying Plaintiff’s application for benefits under the Social Security Act. The matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Shon T. Erwin for initial proceedings in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §636 (b)(1)(B). The parties fully briefed their respective positions and, on June 24, 2014, the Magistrate Judge filed his Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 18] in which he recommended that the Court affirm the decision of the Commissioner. In the Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge advised the parties of the right to file objections to the same and directed the parties to file any objections no later than July 8, 2014. The Magistrate Judge further admonished the parties that failure to timely object would constitute a waiver of the right to appeal. The deadline for filing objections has expired and to date, neither party has filed objections or sought an extension of time in which to do so. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 18] is adopted as though fully set forth herein. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner denying Plaintiff’s application for benefits is AFFIRMED. IT IS SO ORDERED this 15th day of July, 2014. 2 3

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?