From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arnold v. Astrue

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
Feb 10, 2011
Case No. 2:10-cv-13 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 10, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. 2:10-cv-13.

February 10, 2011


ORDER


This matter is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's October 7, 2010 Report and Recommendation. ECF No. 20. The Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court deny plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, grant defendant's motion for summary judgment, and affirm the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security. Report and Recommendation 15, ECF No. 20.

The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge specifically advises the parties that the failure to object to the Report and Recommendation within fourteen days of the Report results in a "waiver of the right to de novo review by the District Judge and waiver of the right to appeal the judgment of the District Court." Report and Recommendation 16, ECF No. 20. The time period for filing objections to the Report and Recommendation has expired. Plaintiff has not objected to the Report and Recommendation.

The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Noting that no objections have been filed and that the time for filing such objections has expired, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. Defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is AFFIRMED. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter JUDGMENT for defendant. This action is hereby DISMISSED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Arnold v. Astrue

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
Feb 10, 2011
Case No. 2:10-cv-13 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 10, 2011)
Case details for

Arnold v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:Randal Alan Arnold, Plaintiff, v. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division

Date published: Feb 10, 2011

Citations

Case No. 2:10-cv-13 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 10, 2011)

Citing Cases

Daniel v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

" Hedger v. Astrue 2012 WL 468546, *9 (S.D.Ohio 2012)(citing Martin v. Commissioner, 61 F. App'x 191, 194 n.…

Comberger v. Colvin

As such, a GAF assessment is isolated to a relatively brief period of time, rather than being significantly…