Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Fitzpatrick v. Berryhill, 16cv8873. (2018)

Court: District Court, S.D. New York Number: infdco20180222g45 Visitors: 6
Filed: Feb. 21, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2018
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM H. PAULEY, III , District Judge . Plaintiff Christine Fitzpatrick commenced this action seeking judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security's ("Commissioner") denial of her application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental social security income. 42 U.S.C. 405(g). On November 22, 2016, this Court referred the matter to the assigned Magistrate Judge. 1 On April 21, 2017, Fitzpatrick moved for judgment on the pleadings. On June 20, 2017, the Commission
More

ORDER

Plaintiff Christine Fitzpatrick commenced this action seeking judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security's ("Commissioner") denial of her application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental social security income. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On November 22, 2016, this Court referred the matter to the assigned Magistrate Judge.1 On April 21, 2017, Fitzpatrick moved for judgment on the pleadings. On June 20, 2017, the Commissioner crossmoved for judgment on the pleadings. On January 30, 2018, Magistrate Judge Netburn issued her Report and Recommendation, recommending that this Court deny Fitzpatrick's motion and grant the Commissioner's cross-motion. No objections to the Report and Recommendation were filed.

A district court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). In reviewing a Report and Recommendation that has not been objected to, a court "need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record." Simms v. Graham, 2011 WL 6072400, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 6, 2011).

This Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Netburn's extremely thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation, and finds that it is not erroneous on its face. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Accordingly, this Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The parties' failure to file written objections to the Report and Recommendation precludes appellate review of this decision. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985).

Accordingly, Fitzpatrick's motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied, and the Commissioner's cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions pending at ECF Nos. 9 and 19, and mark this case as closed.

FootNotes


1. This case was initially assigned to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker but subsequently re-assigned to Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer