Filing 22

ORDER ADOPTING 21 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Court hereby orders this case be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution. Signed by Judge Richard L. Young on 8/20/2009.(TMD)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA EVANSVILLE DIVISION RAY McKINNEY, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 3:08-cv-108-RLY/WGH ENTRY ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION This matter is before the Honorable Richard L. Young, United States District Judge, on the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation dated July 17, 2009, which was provided pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)1)(B). (Docket # 21). Upon review of a report and recommendation, the court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations of the magistrate judge. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The court must review de novo those portions of the report to which objections are made. Id. Those portions of the report and recommendation to which no objection is registered are reviewed by the court for clear error. Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999). Plaintiff, in this case, has failed to object to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and the court's review reveals that it is free of clear error. The court, therefore, adopts the Report and Recommendation and concludes that Plaintiff has failed to comply with the court's orders, and has failed to file a proper brief in this Social Security Disability Benefits case. This court hereby ORDERS this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for want of prosecution. SO ORDERED this 20th day of August 2009. RICHARD L. YOUNG, Judge United States District Court Southern District of Indiana Electronic copy to: Thomas E. Kieper UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Copy to: RAY McKINNEY 1603 N. 7th Avenue Evansville, IN 47710 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?