Hurley v. Colvin
Filing
19
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting and incorporating the 18 Proposed Findings and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge; denying the plaintiff's 13 motion for judgment on the pleadings; granting the defendant's 14 motion for judgment on the pleadings; and affirming the decision of the Commissioner. Signed by Judge John T. Copenhaver, Jr. on 7/13/2015. (cc: counsel of record; United States Magistrate Judge) (taq)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
AT CHARLESTON
LORNA CARMEN HURLEY,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action No. 2:14-12131
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The court having received the Proposed Findings and
Recommendation of United States Magistrate Dwane L. Tinsley, entered
on February 27, 2015; and the magistrate judge having recommended
that the court deny plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings;
and the magistrate judge having further recommended that the court
grant defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, affirm the
final decision of the Commissioner, and dismiss this matter from the
court’s docket; and no objection having been filed to the Proposed
Findings and Recommendation, it is ORDERED that:
1.
The findings made in the Proposed Findings and
Recommendation of the magistrate judge be, and they hereby are,
adopted by the court and incorporated herein;
2.
The plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings
be, and it hereby is, denied;
3.
The defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings
be, and it hereby is, granted; and
4.
The decision of the Commissioner be, and it hereby is,
affirmed.
The Clerk is directed to forward copies of this written
opinion and order to all counsel of record and the United States
Magistrate Judge.
DATED: July 13, 2015
John T. Copenhaver, Jr.
United States District Judge
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?