Summary
noting that "[t]he vast majority of [district] courts recently have ruled that a social security claimant may not raise an appointments clause challenge for the first time upon appeal to a federal court"
Summary of this case from Myers v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.Opinion
2:18-cv-00260-JDL
07-30-2019
CHRISTY A. L., Plaintiff, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION COMMISSIONER, Defendant.
ORDER ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
United States Magistrate Judge John H. Rich, III filed his Recommended Decision (ECF No. 28) on Christy A. L.'s social security disability and supplemental security income appeal with the Court on June 19, 2019, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2019) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Christy A. L. filed an Objection to the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 29) and the Commissioner filed a Response to the Objection (ECF No. 30).
After reviewing and considering the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together with the entire record, I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision. I concur with the Magistrate Judge's conclusions as set forth in his Recommended Decision and determine that no further proceeding is necessary.
It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 28) of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ACCEPTED and the Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED.
SO ORDERED.
Dated this 30th day of July, 2019.
/s/ Jon D. Levy
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE