09-2289-cv Terreri v. Astrue UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER Rulings by summary order do not have precedential effect. Citation to a summary order filed on or after January 1, 2007, is permitted and is governed by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 and this court’s Local Rule 32.1.1. When citing a summary order in a document filed with this court, a party must cite either the Federal Appendix or an electronic database (with the notation “summary order”). A party citing a summary order must serve a copy of it on any party not represented by counsel.

At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of New York, on the 3rd day of March, two thousand ten.

PRESENT: JOSÉ A. CABRANES, BARRINGTON D. PARKER, Circuit Judges, EVAN J. WALLACH , Judge.* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x FRANK R. TERRERI, Plaintiff-Appellant, -v.- No. 09-2289-cv MICHAEL J. ASTRUE , Commissioner of Social Security Defendant-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE: VERNON NORWOOD , Special Assistant United States Attorney (Kathleen M. Mehltretter, United States Attorney for the Western District of New York, Stephen P. Conte, Acting Chief Counsel - Region II, Office of General Counsel, Social Security Administration, on the brief) New York, NY.

* The Honorable Evan J. Wallach, of the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation.

COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT: KENNETH HILLER, Law Office of Kenneth Hiller, Amherst, NY.

Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (John T. Curtain, Judge).

UPON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.

Plaintiff Frank R. Terreri appeals from the March 27, 2009 judgment of the District Court denying plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, granting defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, and affirming the decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (the “Commissioner”) denying plaintiff’s application for disability benefits. On appeal plaintiff argues that the District Court erred in affirming the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) because the ALJ failed to consider or explain his reasons for discrediting the opinion of Terreri’s treating physician, in violation of 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527(d)(2). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the facts and procedural history of the case.

We have reviewed each of plaintiff’s claim and find it to be without merit. Substantially for the reasons stated by the District Court in its careful and thoughtful decision dated March 10, 2009, see Terreri v.Astrue, 07-CV-00277 (W.D.N.Y. March 18, 2009), the March 27, 2009 judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT, Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk