Cases

RALPH B. GUY, JR., Circuit Judge. Angela Edwards brought this action for review of the Commissioner’s final decision denying her applications for Social Security Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI). See 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3). Edwards argues that the decision failed to properly weigh certain treating source medical opinions and, therefore, was not supported by substan

654 F.Supp.2d 692 (2009) Nancy EDWARDS, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. Case No. 1:08-cv-374. United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division. September 10, 2009. *695 Themis J. Fotieo, Reamon Fotieo Szczytko & Fedewa, PC, Grand Rapids, MI, for Plaintiff. James E. Hail, Social S

ORDER Louise Edwards appeals a district court judgment that affirmed the denial of her application for supplemental security income benefits. The parties have waived oral argument, and the panel unanimously agrees that it is not needed in this case. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a). Edwards alleged that she became disabled on December 31, 1999. An Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) found that she had not worked since the

ORDER Vanessa Edwards, who is represented by counsel, appeals a district court judgment affirming the Commissioner’s denial of her application for social security disability insurance benefits. The parties have waived oral argument and the panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a). Edwards filed an application for social security disability insurance benefits on Nove

AMENDED LETTER OPINION ORIGINAL ON FILE WITH CLERK OF THE COURT POLITAN, District Judge. Plaintiff Michael Edwards brings this action before the Court seeking to overturn the final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security denying plaintiff’s claim for disability insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”). For the following reasons, the Commissioner’s decision is her

166 F.3d 1205 Michael Edwardsv.Commissioner of Social Security NO. 98-5028 United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. September 28, 1998 Appeal From: D.N.J., 989 F.Supp. 657 1 Affirmed.

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR (PE 17) AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DE 20) Anthony P. Patti, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff, Kristen Jo Gross, Jr., brings this action under 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3) for review of a final decision of *82

PER CURIAM: Teresamingo Gamble, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s order affirming the decision of an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) to deny her application for disability insurance benefits (“DIB”) and supplemental security income (“SSI”). After careful review, we affirm. I. Gamble applied for DIB and SSI on December 8, 2011. She said that she suffered from a number of inju

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER William H. Baughman, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge Introduction Before me1 is an action by Denise Renee Sito under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying her application for disability insurance benefits.2 The Commissioner has

PER CURIAM: Thomas Scott Henry appeals the district court’s decision affirming the Social Security Administration’s denial of his application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. On appeal, Henry argues that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred by (1) refusing to give pr

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: April Summerlin appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Commissioner in this action challenging the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. *635We h

OPINION IKUTA, Circuit Judge: Tim Wilborn appeals the reduction of attorneys’ fees he earned while representing Sherry Parrish in a Social Security benefits claim. 1 Because the Social Security Act (SSA) and the Equal Access to

609 F.3d 847 (2010) Robert KYLE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee. No. 09-3628. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Argued: April 30, 2010. Decided and Filed: June 28, 2010. *848 ARGUED: Shoshana R. Pehowic, O'Connor, Acciani & Levy, Cincinnati, Ohio, for

OPINION PER CURIAM. Robert Middleton, proceeding pro se, appeals the District Court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) in this disability insurance benefits case. For the reasons that follow, we will affirm. I. Because the background of this case is familiar to the parties, we discuss it only briefly he

OPINION PER CURIAM. Robert Middleton, proceeding pro se, appeals the District Court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) in this disability insurance benefits case. For the reasons that follow, we will affirm. I. Because the background of this case is familiar to the parties, we discuss it only briefly he

653 F.Supp.2d 1245 (2009) Johnnie Ray COOK, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. Case No. 6:08-cv-1607-Orl-DAB. United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Orlando Division. August 31, 2009. *1247 Edward S. Rue, Luis R. Gracia, Rue & Ziffra, PA, Port Orange, FL, for Plaintiff. Susan R. Waldron, US

ED CARNES, Chief Judge: Sonya Hunter appeals the district court’s order denying her motion for remand and affirming the Social Security Commissioner’s final decision to deny her application for disability insurance benefits. Hunter contends that the district court should have remanded the case to the Commissioner for further proceedin

SUMMARY ORDER Adriano Duran appeals from an order entered July 19, 2007 by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Irizarry, J.) affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the *136procedural history,

OPINION BARRY, Circuit Judge. Donna Prokopick appeals from an order of the District Court affirming the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying her disability insurance benefits. The District Court exercised jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and we have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We will affirm. I. Because we write primarily for the

524 F.Supp.2d 921 (2007) Edward J. BENTLEY, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. No. 1:05-CV-526. United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division. November 19, 2007. James R. Rinck, Grand Rapids, MI, for Plaintiff. Ronald M. Stella, U.S. Attorney, Grand Rapids, MI, for Defendant. OPINION ROBER