Charles v. Social Security Administration

Filing 30

ORDER denying 24 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 25 Defendnat's Motion for Summary Judgment; Adopting 29 Report and Recommendation; and Closing Case. Signed by Judge Darrin P. Gayles (hs01) NOTICE: If there are sealed documents in this case, they may be unsealed after 1 year or as directed by Court Order, unless they have been designated to be permanently sealed. See Local Rule 5.4 and Administrative Order 2014-69.

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO: 14-61761-CIV-GAYLES/TURNOFF JEAN MARIE CHARLES, Plaintiff, vs. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ____________________________/ ORDER On August 1, 2014, Plaintiff Jean Marie Charles (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint seeking a review of Defendant Carolyn W. Colvin’s (“Defendant”) decision denying disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. [ECF No. 1]. This matter was referred to Magistrate William J. Turnoff for a report and recommendation on dispositive matters [ECF No. 4]. Thereafter, the parties filed their respective cross-motions for Summary Judgment [ECF Nos. 24 & 25]. On August 17, 2016, Judge Turnoff issued a Report and Recommendation (“Report”) [ECF No. 29], recommending that the Court deny Plaintiff’s motion, grant Defendant’s motion, and affirm the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (the “ALJ”). Plaintiff has not timely objected to the Report. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 1 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). If no objections are filed, the district court need only review the report and recommendation for “clear error.” Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note. The Court has undertaken this review and has found no clear error in the analysis and recommendations stated in the Report. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report [ECF No. 29] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED as follows: 1. The Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 24] is DENIED. 2. The Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 25] is GRANTED. 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case and all pending motions are DENIED as moot. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 19th day of September, 2016. ________________________________ DARRIN P. GAYLES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE cc: Magistrate Judge Turnoff All Counsel of Record 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?