Filed: Mar. 05, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 05, 2019
Summary: ORDER CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER , Chief District Judge . AND NOW, this 5th day of March, 2019, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 14) of Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick, recommending that the court deny the appeal of plaintiff Jodi Lynn Hoke ("Hoke") from the decision of the administrative law judge denying her application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits, and it appearing that Hoke has not objected to the report, see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and the cou
Summary: ORDER CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER , Chief District Judge . AND NOW, this 5th day of March, 2019, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 14) of Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick, recommending that the court deny the appeal of plaintiff Jodi Lynn Hoke ("Hoke") from the decision of the administrative law judge denying her application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits, and it appearing that Hoke has not objected to the report, see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and the cour..
More
ORDER
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER, Chief District Judge.
AND NOW, this 5th day of March, 2019, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 14) of Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick, recommending that the court deny the appeal of plaintiff Jodi Lynn Hoke ("Hoke") from the decision of the administrative law judge denying her application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits, and it appearing that Hoke has not objected to the report, see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and the court noting that failure of a party to timely object to a magistrate judge's conclusions "may result in forfeiture of de novo review at the district court level," Nara v. Frank, 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007) (citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878-79 (3d Cir. 1987)), but that, as a matter of good practice, a district court should afford "reasoned consideration" to the uncontested portions of the report, E.E.O.C. v. City of Long Branch, 866 F.3d 93, 100 (3d Cir. 2017) (quoting Henderson, 812 F.2d at 879), in order to "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record," FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes, and, following independent review of the record, the court being in agreement with Judge Mehalchick that the decision of the administrative law judge is "supported by substantial evidence," 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and concluding that there is no clear error on the face of the record, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The report (Doc. 14) of Magistrate Judge Mehalchick is ADOPTED.
2. The decision of the Commissioner denying Hoke's application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits is AFFIRMED.
3. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of the Commissioner and against Hoke as set forth in paragraph 2.
4. The Clerk of Court shall thereafter CLOSE this case.
