From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tirpak v. Colvin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Feb 25, 2014
Civil Action No. 13-143E (W.D. Pa. Feb. 25, 2014)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 13-143E

02-25-2014

ASHLEY MARIE TIRPAK, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.


Judge Cathy Bissoon

Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter


MEMORANDUM ORDER

On August 30, 2013, this case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(l)(A) and (B), and Rules 72.C and 72.D of the Local Rules for Magistrates.

On February 7, 2014, the magistrate judge issued a Report (Doc. 14) recommending that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 9) be denied, and that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 11) be granted. Service of the Report and Recommendation was made on the parties, and no objections have been filed.

After a review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, the following Order is entered:

Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 9) is DENIED, and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 11) is GRANTED. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation dated February 7, 2014 hereby is adopted as the Opinion of the District Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

________________

Cathy Bissoon

United States District Judge
cc (via ECF email notification): All counsel of record


Summaries of

Tirpak v. Colvin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Feb 25, 2014
Civil Action No. 13-143E (W.D. Pa. Feb. 25, 2014)
Case details for

Tirpak v. Colvin

Case Details

Full title:ASHLEY MARIE TIRPAK, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, acting Commissioner…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Feb 25, 2014

Citations

Civil Action No. 13-143E (W.D. Pa. Feb. 25, 2014)

Citing Cases

Luzzi v. Berryhill

(ECF No. 10, pp. 9-11). In fact, case law in this district has consistently held a VE is not required to…