From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Whitson v. Astrue

United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, at Chattanooga
Feb 23, 2010
Case No. 1:08-cv-292 (E.D. Tenn. Feb. 23, 2010)

Opinion

Case No. 1:08-cv-292.

February 23, 2010


ORDER


United States Magistrate Judge William B. Carter filed his report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). [Court Doc. 15.] Neither party filed objections within the given 14 days.

After reviewing the record, the Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Carter's report and recommendation. The Court thus ACCEPTS and ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Carter's findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations pursuant to § 636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b).

Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Court Doc. 11] is DENIED. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Court Doc. 13] is GRANTED. The Commissioner's denial of benefits is AFFIRMED and the instant action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk shall close the case.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Whitson v. Astrue

United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, at Chattanooga
Feb 23, 2010
Case No. 1:08-cv-292 (E.D. Tenn. Feb. 23, 2010)
Case details for

Whitson v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:JEFFREY R. WHITSON, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, at Chattanooga

Date published: Feb 23, 2010

Citations

Case No. 1:08-cv-292 (E.D. Tenn. Feb. 23, 2010)

Citing Cases

Kostyo v. Harvey

The treatment which Kostyo was prescribed for his adhesive capsulitis was the standard treatment. See, e.g.,…