Case Name: Stephanie HUDSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-08-07
Citations: 42 F. App'x 752
Docket Number: No. 01-2336
Parties: Stephanie HUDSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before MOORE and GILMAN, Circuit Judges; ROSEN, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 42
Pages: 752–752

Head Matter:
Stephanie HUDSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 01-2336.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Aug. 7, 2002.
Before MOORE and GILMAN, Circuit Judges; ROSEN, District Judge.
The Honorable Gerald E. Rosen, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
Stephanie Hudson, proceeding pro se, appeals a district court judgment that affirmed the Commissioner's denial of her claim for social security disability benefits. The case has been referred to this panel pursuant to Rule 34(j)(l), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. We unanimously agree that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a).
Upon review of the briefs and the record, we affirm the district court's judgment. Because the magistrate judge articulated, and the district court adopted, specific and thorough reasons for the decision, the issuance of a detailed written opinion would be duplicative and would serve no useful purpose.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment for the reasons stated and adopted by the district court in the order entered on July 11, 2001. Rule 34(j)(2)(C), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.