Cases

OPINION AND ORDER MARSH, District Judge. Plaintiff Melissa Jo Young seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying her application for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) disability benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1381-13831 This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3). For the reasons that foll

OPINION AND ORDER Malcolm F. Marsh, United States District Judge Plaintiff Denis Murray seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying his application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits (“DIB”) under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-403. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). For the reasons

OPINION AND ORDER Malcolm P. Marsh, United States District Judge Plaintiff Suzanne E. Sutherland seeks judicial review of the partially favorable decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying her application for disability insurance benefits (“DIB”) under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-403. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3). For t

OPINION AND ORDER MARSH, District Judge. Plaintiff Kathleen J. Peterson seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security that partially denied her applications for Disabled Widow’s Benefits (DWB) under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-403, and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) disability benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.

OPINION AND ORDER MARSH, District Judge. Plaintiff Ryan Jacob Woll seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying his application for disability insurance benefits (DIB) under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-403, and application for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) *1200disabil

OPINION AND ORDER MARSH, District Judge. Plaintiff Kuestan Jalal Mahmood seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying her application for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) disability benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1381-1383f. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(e)(3). For the reasons that fol

MEMORANDUM! OPINION AND ORDER LEONARD T. STRAND, United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Jody Jolene Berry seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the Commissioner) denying her application for Social Security Disability benefits (DIB) under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 401 et seq. (Act). Berry contends that the administrative reco

622 F.3d 1228 (2010) Daniel BERRY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee. No. 09-35421. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Filed September 22, 2010. Argued and Submitted March 5, 2010. *1230 Charles W. Talbot, Tacoma, WA, for the appellant.

Joyce M. Berry appeals a district court judgment affirming the Commissioner’s denial of her application for social security disability insurance benefits. The parties have waived oral argument and this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a). Berry filed an application for social security disability insurance benefits alleging that she suffered from back pain. Following a hearing, the administrati

Mary Alice Theiler, United States Magistrate Judge Plaintiff proceeds through counsel in his appeal of a final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (Commissioner). The Commissioner denied plaintiff's applications1 for Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) after a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). Having considered the ALJ'

DECISION and ORDER GLENN T. SUDDABY, District Judge. The above matter comes to this Court following a Report-Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Andrew T. Baxter, filed on April.8, 2015, recommending that the Commissioner’s decision denying disability benefits be reversed, and the ease be remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)

OPINION AND ORDER FRANK MAAS, United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Kathy Jo Simmons (“Simmons”) brings this action pursuant to Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act (“Act”), as amended; 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying her application for disability insurance benefits. The parties have filed cross-motio

MEMORANDUM DECISION FRANK MAAS, United States Magistrate Judge. Pro se plaintiff Denise M. Hairston (“Hairston”) brings this action pursuant to Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act (“Act”), as amended, 42 U.S.C. §.405(g), seeking review of a final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”) denying the application of her minor daughter, S.N.

OPINION AND ORDER GABRIEL W. GORENSTEIN, United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Darryl Collins, proceeding pro se, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to obtain judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying his claim for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act. The Commissioner has moved for judgment on the ple

MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER GLENN T. SUDDABY, District Judge. Currently before the Court, in this action seeking Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”), filed by Milton H. Popick (“Plaintiff’) against the Commissioner of Social Security Commissioner (“Defendant”) under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and 1383(c)(3), are the following: (1) Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 18); (2) P

ORDER SCULLIN, Senior District Judge. Plaintiff commenced this action on November 23, 2009, seeking judicial review of Defendant’s final decision denying him supplement security income benefits and .disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act. See Dkt. No. 1. Defendant filed an answer on March 8, 2010. See Dkt. No. 8. Plaintiff filed a supporting brief on March 22, 2010,

ORDER NORMAN A. MORDUE, District Judge. The above matter comes to me following a ReporUReeommendation by Magistrate Judge Victor E. Bianehini, duly filed on the 29th day of February 2012. Following fourteen (14) days from the service thereof, the Clerk has sent me the file, including any and all objections filed by the parties herein. After careful review of all of the papers h

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1480 BRIAN EDWARD REID, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (6:11-cv-02408-TMC) Argued: May

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION BERNARD A. FRIEDMAN, Senior District Judge. This matter is presently before the court on cross motions for summary judgment. Magistrate Judge Michael Hluehaniuk has submitted a Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) in which he recommends that the court deny plaintiffs motion and grant defendant’s motion. Plaintiff has file

536 F.Supp.2d 403 (2008) Hermena GLADDEN, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. No. 06 Civ. 3671 (AJP). United States District Court, S.D. New York. February 29, 2008. *404 Hermena L. Gladden, Yonkers, NY, pro se. John E. Gura, Jr., U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of New York, New York, NY, fo