-RNB Velia L. Foster v. Michael J. Astrue, No. 2:2010cv07999 - Document 37 (C.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge S. James Otero for Report and Recommendation 31 : IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that (1) plaintiffs motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied; (2) the Commissioner's cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted; and (3) Judgment be entered affirming the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security and dismissing this action with prejudice. (rla)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-RNB Velia L. Foster v. Michael J. Astrue Doc. 37 1 ( ( 11 2 3 4 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS SERVED BY . . FIRST CLASS MAil POSIAGE PREPAID, TO All GetH+!i~\C\.1 (OR PARmS) AT THEIR RESPECTIVE MOST RECENT ADDRESS OF RECORD IN THIS ACTION ON THIS DATE. DAlEO: 5 6 FILED CLERK, U.S.D.C. SOUTHERN DIVISION SEP 212011 ,;;l'" . l \ ~'rfUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 9 CIt· I. l ' r V"\. T> ",.. VELlA A. FOSTER, Case No. CV 10-7999-SJO (RNB) 10 11 Plaintiff, vs. 12 13 14 MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Defendant. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Complaint, records on file, and the Report and Recommendation ofthe United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiffhas filed objections to the Report and Recommendation, I and the Court has engaged in a de novo review ofthose portions ofthe Report and Recommendation to which her objections have been made. The Court accepts the findings and recommendations ofthe Magistrate 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Included with plaintiffs objections was a document captioned "Complaint for Filing a New Motion with the Lack of Legal System to Provide Auxiliary Aids." In addition, plaintiff concurrently filed a document captioned "Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Appointing Nation-wide (or) Nation-state wide Internal Revenue EEOC Attorney for the Deaf Employees." Since the Court's jurisdiction in this action arises under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and is confined to reviewing the Commissioner's denial ofbenefits, the Court is unable to consider either of these documents. Dockets.Justia.com 1 Judge. 2 IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that (1) plaintiffs motion for judgment on the 3 pleadings is denied; (2) the Commissioner's cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings 4 is granted; and (3) Judgment be entered affirming the decision of the Commissioner of 5 Social Security and dismissing this action with prejudice. 1 ----f--Ji/2-> 1 S.JAME~ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
