From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Parsons v. Astrue

United States District Court, S.D. West Virginia, Beckley Division
Mar 13, 2009
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:07-cv-00784 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 13, 2009)

Summary

stating that, although the ALJ did not explicitly identify which treatment records were inconsistent with the treating physician's opinion when according the opinion no weight, "the inconsistencies [were] clear from the ALJ's prior summary of the evidence"

Summary of this case from Tennant v. Colvin

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:07-cv-00784.

March 13, 2009


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Pending before the Court are the parties' Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings [Dockets 10 and 13]. By Standing Order entered on August 1, 2006, and filed in this case on December 4, 2007, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation (PF R). Magistrate Judge VanDervort filed his PF R [Docket 15] on February 23, 2009, recommending that this Court deny Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Docket 10], grant Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Docket 13], affirm the final decision of the Commissioner, and dismiss this matter from the Court's docket.

The Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the findings or recommendation to which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). In addition, failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and Plaintiff's right to appeal this Court's Order. Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Here, objections to Magistrate Judge VanDervort's PF R were due by March 12, 2009, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). To date, no objections have been filed.

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF R [Docket 15] in its entirety, DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Docket 10], GRANTS Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Docket 13], AFFIRMS the final decision of the Commissioner, and DISMISSES this matter from the Court's docket. A separate Judgment Order will enter this day implementing the rulings contained herein.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party.


Summaries of

Parsons v. Astrue

United States District Court, S.D. West Virginia, Beckley Division
Mar 13, 2009
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:07-cv-00784 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 13, 2009)

stating that, although the ALJ did not explicitly identify which treatment records were inconsistent with the treating physician's opinion when according the opinion no weight, "the inconsistencies [were] clear from the ALJ's prior summary of the evidence"

Summary of this case from Tennant v. Colvin

stating that, although the ALJ did not explicitly identify which treatment records were inconsistent with the treating physician's opinion when according the opinion no weight, "the inconsistencies [were] clear from the ALJ's prior summary of the evidence"

Summary of this case from Wagoner v. Colvin
Case details for

Parsons v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE A. PARSONS, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. West Virginia, Beckley Division

Date published: Mar 13, 2009

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:07-cv-00784 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 13, 2009)

Citing Cases

Wagoner v. Colvin

Because the ALJ stated that Dr. Rao's opinion was extreme and inconsistent with his own treatment notes,…

Tennant v. Colvin

The ALJ made clear the inconsistencies between Drs. Singer and Papadimitriou's opinions and the evidence of…