Hopwood v. Colvin
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation 13 of Magistrate Judge Saporito;2. The Commissioners decision is AFFIRMED, and Plaintiff Jean Hopwoods request for an award of benefits is DENIED; 3. Judgment is entered in favor of the Commissioner and against Plaintiff; and 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the case. Signed by Honorable Yvette Kane on 6/19/17. (rw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,1
(Magistrate Judge Saporito)
THE BACKGROUND OF THIS ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:
Before the Court is the May 26, 2017 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge
Saporito (Doc. No. 13), recommending that the Court affirm the Social Security Commissioner’s
final decision denying Plaintiff Jean Hopwood’s application for disability insurance benefits
under Title II of the Social Security Act on the basis that substantial evidence supports the
Administrative Law Judge’s determination that Plaintiff was not disabled under the Social
Security Act between January 1, 2009 and June 30, 2011. (Doc. No. 13.) No timely objections
have been filed.
AND SO, on this 19th day of June 2017, upon independent review of the record and
applicable law, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 13), of
Magistrate Judge Saporito;
2. The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED, and Plaintiff Jean Hopwood’s
request for an award of benefits is DENIED;
3. Judgment is entered in favor of the Commissioner and against Plaintiff; and
Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 42 U.S.C. §405(g), Acting
Commissioner Nancy A. Berryhill is automatically substituted as the named defendant in place
of the former Commissioner of Social Security.
4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the case.
s/ Yvette Kane
Yvette Kane, District Judge
United States District Court
Middle District of Pennsylvania
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?