Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

MAGRUDER v. COLVIN, 2:16-CV-15 (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. West Virginia Number: infdco20161103m68 Visitors: 5
Filed: Nov. 02, 2016
Latest Update: Nov. 02, 2016
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION JOHN PRESTON BAILEY , Chief District Judge . On this day, the above-styled matter came before this Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Robert W. Trumble [Doc. 23]. Pursuant to this Court's Local Rules, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Trumble's for submission of a proposed Report and Recommendation ("R & R"). Magistrate Judge Trumble filed his R&R on October 14, 2016, wherein he reco
More

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On this day, the above-styled matter came before this Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Robert W. Trumble [Doc. 23]. Pursuant to this Court's Local Rules, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Trumble's for submission of a proposed Report and Recommendation ("R & R"). Magistrate Judge Trumble filed his R&R on October 14, 2016, wherein he recommends this Court grant defendant Commissioner Carolyn W. Colvin's ("the Commissioner") Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 14], and deny plaintiff Stacey L. Magruder's ("Magruder's") Statement of Errors [Doc. 8].

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). In addition, failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the right to appeal this Court's Order. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Here, objections to Magistrate Judge Trumble's R&R were due within fourteen (14) days of receipt, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). The docket reflects that the R&R was electronically mailed to all counsel of record on October 14, 2016, and that service was accepted the same day [Doc. 23]. To date, no objections have been filed. Accordingly, this Court will review the R&R for clear error.

Upon careful review of the above, it is the opinion of this Court that the Report and Recommendation [Doc. 23] should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated in the magistrate judge's report.

Accordingly, this Court ORDERS that the Commissioner's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 14] is GRANTED, and that plaintiff Magruder's Statement of Errors [Doc. 8] is DENIED. The Clerk is directed to enter judgement in favor of the defendant. Finally, this matter is ORDERED STRICKEN from the active docket of this Court.

It is so ORDERED.

The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to all counsel of record.

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