Gordon v. Commissioner of Social Security ( 2022 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA MARTINSBURG REBECCA E. GORDON, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:21-CV-63 (GROH) KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Now before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) issued by United States Magistrate Judge Michael John Aloi. ECF No. 25. Pursuant to the Local Rules, this civil action was referred to Judge Aloi for submission of a proposed R&R. Judge Aloi issued an R&R on May 24, 2022, recommending that the Plaintiff’s Motions for Summary Judgment [ECF Nos. 18 & 24] be DENIED and the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 21] be GRANTED. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions of the magistrate judge’s findings to which objection is made. However, the Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the findings or recommendation to which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and of the Plaintiff’s right to appeal this Court’s Order. 28.U.S.C..§.636(b)(1); see Webb v. Califano, 468 F. Supp. 825, 830-31 (E.D. Cal. 1979); see also Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Objections to Magistrate Judge Aloi’s R&R were due within fourteen days after entry of the R&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), 72(b). The day after the R&R was entered, the Plaintiff filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Objections [ECF No. 26], which the Court granted. The Plaintiff’s objections were due on or before June 21, 2022. As of the date of this Order, no objections have been filed. Therefore, the Court finds that the deadline to submit objections to the R&R has passed. Accordingly, this Court will review the R&R for clear error. In this matter, Judge Aloi found that the Commissioner’s decision to deny the Plaintiff’s claim for disability insurance benefits does not contain legal error and is supported by substantial evidence. Upon careful review of the R&R, it is the opinion of this Court that Magistrate Judge Aloi’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 25] should be, and is hereby, ORDERED ADOPTED. For the reasons more fully stated in the R&R, the Court FURTHER ORDERS that the Plaintiff’s Motions for Summary Judgment [ECF Nos. 18 & 24] be DENIED, the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 21] be GRANTED, the decision of the Commissioner be AFFIRMED and this case be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter a separate order of judgment in favor of the Defendant. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to STRIKE this case from the Court’s active docket. The Clerk is further DIRECTED to transmit copies of this Order to all counsel of record herein. DATED: June 30, 2022 GINA $ 7GROH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE