Halloran v. Colvin

ORDER

SARAH S. VANCE, District Judge.

Before the Court are plaintiff Lawrence Halloran’s objections1 to the Magistrate’s Findings and Recommendation2 (“F & R”) denying plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment. Having reviewed de novo the record, the Magistrate’s F & R, the plain*613tiffs objections thereto, and the applicable law, the Court agrees ■ with the Magistrate’s recommendation and adopts the F & R as its opinion. The C'ourt rejects plaintiffs objections to the ,F & R for the following reasons.

Halloran contends that the Magistrate came to the “incorrect legal conclusion that 20 C.F.R. §…