Sanders v. Astrue

Filing 16

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATIONS re: 15 Memorandum and Recommendations. The Pltf's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED 12 ; The Dft's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. This case is DISMISSED.(Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt) Parties notified.(chorace)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
SUSAN SANDERS,
Plaintiff,
VS.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Defendant.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:12-CV-2913

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE’S MEMORANDUM AND
RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING CASE
Pending before the Court is the Memorandum and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge George C. Hanks, Jr. On October 9, 2012, this case was referred to Judge
Hanks pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Pending before Judge Hanks were the plaintiff’s
Motion for Summary Judgment and the defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. On
November 12, 2014, Judge Hanks filed a Memorandum and Recommendation recommending
that the plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment be denied, and the Commissioner’s Motion be
granted (Dkt. No. 15).
No objections have been filed to the Memorandum and Recommendation. Accordingly,
the Court reviews the Memorandum and Recommendation for plain error on the face of the
record. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also, FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3).
Based on the pleadings, the record and the applicable law, the Court finds that there is no
plain error apparent from the face of the record. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND
ADJUDGED that:
(1)

(2)

1/2

Judge Hanks’ Memorandum and Recommendation is APPROVED AND
ADOPTED in its entirety as the holding of the Court;
The plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED;

(3)

The defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED; and

(4)

The case is DISMISSED.

It is so ORDERED.
SIGNED on this 8th day of December, 2014.

___________________________________
Kenneth M. Hoyt
United States District Judge

2/2