From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Freeman v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Oct 9, 2012
3:11-CV-00401-JE (D. Or. Oct. 9, 2012)

Opinion

3:11-CV-00401-JE

10-09-2012

JANELLE M. FREEMAN, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendant.

LISA J. PORTER KP law LLC Attorney at Law Attorneys for Plaintiff S. AMANDA MARSHALL United States Attorney ADRIAN L. BROWN Assistant United States Attorney DAVID MORADO Regional Chief Counsel BENJAMIN J. GROEBNER Special Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendant


ORDER

LISA J. PORTER
KP law LLC
Attorney at Law

Attorneys for Plaintiff S. AMANDA MARSHALL
United States Attorney
ADRIAN L. BROWN
Assistant United States Attorney
DAVID MORADO
Regional Chief Counsel
BENJAMIN J. GROEBNER
Special Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for Defendant

BROWN, Judge.

Magistrate Judge John Jelderks issued Findings and Recommendation (#26) on August 29, 2012, in which he recommends the Court affirm the Commissioner's decision denying Plaintiff's application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. Plaintiff filed timely Objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).

When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). See also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).

This Court has reviewed the record de novo, including Plaintiff's Objections. In her Objections, Plaintiff reiterates the arguments she previously made, each of which the Magistrate Judge thoroughly addressed in his Findings and Recommendation. The Court concludes Plaintiff has not provided a basis to modify or to alter the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation as to any of the issues addressed herein or to remand this matter to the Commissioner for further development of the record.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Jelderks's Findings and Recommendation (#26). Accordingly, the Court AFFIRMS the Commissioner's decision and DISMISSES this matter.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_________________

ANNA J. BROWN

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Freeman v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Oct 9, 2012
3:11-CV-00401-JE (D. Or. Oct. 9, 2012)
Case details for

Freeman v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:JANELLE M. FREEMAN, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner, Social…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Date published: Oct 9, 2012

Citations

3:11-CV-00401-JE (D. Or. Oct. 9, 2012)

Citing Cases

Strong v. Colvin

The claimant must offer a "theory, plausible or otherwise," as to how his impairments combine to equal a…

Sortor v. Colvin

The claimant must offer a "theory, plausible or otherwise," as to how her impairments combine to equal a…