Petro v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 17

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 16 Report and Recommendation.. Signed by Honorable Timothy D. DeGiusti on 1/27/2017. (mb)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA CATHY PETRO, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. CIV-16-644-D ORDER Plaintiff Cathy Petro brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 423(d)(1)(A) for review of the defendant Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration’s final decision that Plaintiff was not “disabled” under the terms of the Social Security Act. The matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell for initial proceedings in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The parties briefed their respective positions and, on January 4, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed her Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 16] in which she recommended an entry of judgment affirming the Acting Commissioner’s final decision. In her 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 January 24, 2017. The Magistrate Judge further admonished the parties that failure to timely object would constitute a waiver of the right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues addressed in the Report and Recommendation. The deadline for filing objections has expired and to date, neither party has filed an objection or sought an extension of time in which to do so. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 16] is ADOPTED as though fully set forth herein. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the final decision of the Acting Commissioner is hereby AFFIRMED. A separate judgment will follow. IT IS SO ORDERED this 27th day of January, 2017. 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?