Flatt v. Social Security Administration et al

Filing 16

ORDER: Having conducted the de novo review required by Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court agrees with the recommended disposition. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 15 ) is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED; Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record (Doc. No. 12 ) is DENIED; and the Commissioner of Social Security's decision to deny benefits is AFFIRMED. The Clerk of the Court shall enter a final judgment in accordance with Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by Chief Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 5/16/2017. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(mg)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NORTHEASTERN DIVISION CATHY ELLEN FLATT, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ) NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ) Acting Commissioner of Social Security, ) ) Defendant. ) No. 2:16-cv-00018 CHIEF JUDGE CRENSHAW ORDER Magistrate Judge Frensley has entered a lengthy Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 15) in which he recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record (Doc. No. 12) be denied. No objections have been filed. Having conducted the de novo review required by Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court agrees with the recommended disposition. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 15) is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED; Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record (Doc. No. 12) is DENIED; and the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision to deny benefits is AFFIRMED. The Clerk of the Court shall enter a final judgment in accordance with Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. It is SO ORDERED. __________________________________________ WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR. CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?