From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Losser v. Astrue

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Aug 12, 2008
Civil Action No. 07-1473 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 12, 2008)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 07-1473.

August 12, 2008


ORDER


AND NOW, this 12th day of August, 2008, after the plaintiff, Maryann Losser, filed an action in the above-captioned case, and after cross-motions for summary judgment were submitted by the parties, and after a Report and Recommendation was filed by the United States Magistrate Judge granting the parties until August 8, 2008, to file written objections thereto, and upon consideration of the objections filed by the plaintiff, and upon independent review of the record, and upon consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, which is adopted as the opinion of this Court,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment filed on behalf of the plaintiff [Dkt. 13] is DENIED, and that the motion filed on behalf of the defendant [Dkt. 15] is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, if the plaintiff desires to appeal from this Order she must do so within thirty (30) days by filing a notice of appeal as provided in Rule 3, Fed.R.App.P.


Summaries of

Losser v. Astrue

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Aug 12, 2008
Civil Action No. 07-1473 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 12, 2008)
Case details for

Losser v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:MARYANN LOSSER, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Aug 12, 2008

Citations

Civil Action No. 07-1473 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 12, 2008)

Citing Cases

Sharp v. Astrue

In accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 423(f), a claimant's DIB or SSI benefits may be terminated when disability has…

People v. Smith

It is not uncommon for a physician to prescribe treatment based on a belief that it might/may benefit the…