Peden v. Berryhill, 1:18-cv-00234-FDW-DSC. (2019)
Court: District Court, W.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20190724c02
Visitors: 15
Filed: Jul. 23, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 23, 2019
Summary: ORDER FRANK D. WHITNEY , District Judge . THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation ("M&R"). (Doc. No. 10). The M&R was entered on June 6, 2019. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) allows a party fourteen (14) days to file specific written objections to a Magistrate Judge's proposed findings and recommendations. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). "[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but inst
Summary: ORDER FRANK D. WHITNEY , District Judge . THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation ("M&R"). (Doc. No. 10). The M&R was entered on June 6, 2019. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) allows a party fourteen (14) days to file specific written objections to a Magistrate Judge's proposed findings and recommendations. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). "[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but inste..
More
ORDER
FRANK D. WHITNEY, District Judge.
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation ("M&R"). (Doc. No. 10). The M&R was entered on June 6, 2019. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) allows a party fourteen (14) days to file specific written objections to a Magistrate Judge's proposed findings and recommendations. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). "[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must `only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.'" Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005).
By copy of the M&R, each party was advised of their right to file written objections and no objections were subsequently filed. The Court has reviewed the record and has found no clear error as to the Magistrate Judge's recommendation. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS and APPROVES the findings and recommendations set forth in the M&R. (Doc. No. 10, p. 8). Plaintiff's "Motion for Summary Judgment," (Doc. No. 7), is hereby DENIED; Defendant's "Motion for Summary Judgment," (Doc. No. 8), is hereby GRANTED; and the Commissioner's determination is AFFIRMED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
