Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00558/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00558-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:427 Social Security Benenfits

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SYLVIA HOLLIS MILLIMAN,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 11-CV-558-MMA(NLS)

vs. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED

STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE;

[Doc. No. 19]

DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT;

[Doc. No. 15]

GRANTING DEFENDANT’S CROSS

-MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT

[Doc. No. 16]

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of

Social Security,

Defendant.

On March 21, 2011, Plaintiff Sylvia Milliman filed this appeal of the final judgment of the

Commissioner of Social Security denying her claim for Disability Insurance Benefits and

Supplemental Security Income. The matter was referred to the Honorable Nita L. Stormes, United

States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Civil Local Rule 72.1. On March

5, 2012, Judge Stormes filed a Report containing findings and conclusions, upon which she bases

her recommendation that the Court deny Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and grant

Defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment.

/ / /

- 1 - 11CV558

Case 3:11-cv-00558-MMA-NLS Document 20 Filed 04/18/12 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

The time to file objections to the R&E expired on March 26, 2012. [Doc. No. 19 at 10.] 

Plaintiff, who has been represented by counsel throughout this case, did not file objections during

the objection period or since the time to do so expired.

The Court has considered the pleadings and memoranda of the parties as well as the

administrative record, and has made a review and determination in accordance with the requirements

of 28 U.S.C. § 636 and applicable case law. Accordingly, good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 19] is ADOPTED in its entirety; 

2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 15] is DENIED; and

3. Defendant’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 16] is GRANTED.

The Clerk of Court is instructed to close this matter.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 18, 2012

Hon. Michael M. Anello

United States District Judge

- 2 - 11CV558

Case 3:11-cv-00558-MMA-NLS Document 20 Filed 04/18/12 Page 2 of 2