(SS) Vanderhoff v. Commissioner of Social Security

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 6, 20251:23-cv-01175California6,365 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JORDAN RAY VANDERHOFF, Case No. 1:23-cv-01175-HBK Plaintiff, ORDER AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF

THE COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL

v. SECURITY1 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL (Doc. Nos. 15, 17)

SECURITY,

15 Defendant. 16 17 18 19 Jordan Ray Vanderhoff (“Plaintiff”) seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner” or “Defendant”) denying her application for supplemental security income under the Social Security Act. (Doc. No. 1). The matter is currently before the undersigned on the parties’ briefs, which were submitted without oral argument. (Doc. Nos. 15, 17). For the reasons stated, the Court denies Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, grants Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, and affirms the Commissioner’s decision. 27 Both parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §636(c)(1). (Doc. No. 10). I. …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.