Bert Hicks v. Andrew Saul

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJuly 6, 20212:20-cv-04922California4,023 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 BERT H.,1 Case No. 2:20-cv-04922-GJS

12 Plaintiff

13 v. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND

ORDER

14 ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security, 15 Defendant. 16

17 18 I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 19 Plaintiff Bert H. (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint seeking review of the decision 20 of the Commissioner of Social Security denying his applications for Disability 21 Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”). The parties 22 filed consents to proceed before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge 23 [Dkts. 5 and 11] and briefs addressing disputed issues in the case [Dkt. 18 (“Pl. 24 Br.”) and Dkt. 21 (“Def. Br.”).] The matter is now ready for decision. For the 25 reasons discussed below, the Court finds that this matter should be affirmed. 26

27 1 In the interest of privacy, this Order uses only the first name and the initial of the last name of the non-governmental party. 28 1 II. ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION…

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.