Hudson v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner

Filing 15

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Madeline Hughes Haikala on 12/22/2016. (KEK)

Download PDF
FILED 2016 Dec-22 PM 04:23 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION ROBERT ROMAREZ HUDSON, Plaintiff vs. COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2:15-cv-01936-MHH ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION On November 7, 2016, the magistrate judge entered a report in which he recommended that the Court dismiss this social security appeal with prejudice because pro se plaintiff Robert Romarez Hudson failed to file his complaint in a timely manner. (Doc. 14). The magistrate judge advised the parties of their right to file written objections within fourteen (14) days. (Doc. 14, pp. 4-5). To date, neither party has filed objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). A district court reviews legal conclusions in a report de novo and reviews for plain error Page 1 of 2 factual findings to which no objection is made. Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n. 9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 745, 749 (11th Cir. 1988); Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 Fed. Appx. 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). After careful consideration of the record in this case and the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the Court finds no misstatements of law in the report and no plain error in the magistrate judge’s description of the relevant facts. Therefore, the Court adopts the magistrate judge’s report and accepts his recommendation. The Court will enter a separate final order dismissing this action. DONE this 22nd day of December, 2016. MADELINE HUGHES HAIKALA U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Page 2 of 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?