From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ross v. Astrue

United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina
Jan 23, 2008
1:05CV968 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 23, 2008)

Summary

ruling that physician's reference to plaintiff's height and weight, without discussion, supported ALJ's conclusion that obesity did not limit her ability to work

Summary of this case from Edge v. Colvin

Opinion

1:05CV968.

January 23, 2008


ORDER


On November 28, 2007, the United States Magistrate Judge's Recommendation was filed and notice was served on the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. Plaintiff filed objections to the Recommendation within the time limit prescribed by Section 636 and Defendant filed a response.

The court has reviewed the parties' submissions de novo and finds they do not change the substance of the United States Magistrate Judge's rulings which are affirmed and adopted.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. No. 10) is denied, that Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. No. 13) is granted, and that this action be, and the same hereby is, dismissed.


Summaries of

Ross v. Astrue

United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina
Jan 23, 2008
1:05CV968 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 23, 2008)

ruling that physician's reference to plaintiff's height and weight, without discussion, supported ALJ's conclusion that obesity did not limit her ability to work

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

Ross v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:SHARON L. ROSS, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina

Date published: Jan 23, 2008

Citations

1:05CV968 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 23, 2008)

Citing Cases

Edge v. Colvin

In light of this, the undersigned cannot conclude that the ALJ's failure to explicitly mention Plaintiff's…

Childers v. Astrue

This circumstance provides an additional reason for the Court to decline to treat the absence of discussion…