Cowan v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 24

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Signed by Judge Rebecca Grady Jennings on 1/18/2023 accepting 23 Report and Recommendations. The Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate, (DE 23 ), is ACCEPTED in whole and INCORPORATED by reference. A separate judgment shall issue this date. cc: Counsel (SMJ)

Case 3:21-cv-00568-RGJ-RSE Document 24 Filed 01/18/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 522

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
LOUISVILLE DIVISION
TYRIAN C.

Plaintiff

v.

Civil Action No. 3:21-cv-568-RGJ-CHL

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

Defendant

* * * * *
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court on the Complaint filed by Plaintiff Tyrian C.
("Plaintiff") challenging

the

final

decision

of

the

Commissioner

of

Social

Security (“Commissioner”) denying her claim for disability insurance benefits. [DE 1]. Plaintiff
filed a Fact and Law Summary [DE 19], and the Commissioner filed a Fact and Law Summary
[DE 22]. This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Regina S. Edwards
for

report

and recommendation. [DE 2]. Judge Edwards entered her Report and

Recommendation [DE 23] on January 3, 2023, recommending that the final decision of the
Commissioner be affirmed. The time for objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation
expired on January 17, 2022. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Plaintiff
did not file objections and the time for doing so has passed. This matter is now ripe for
adjudication.
A district court may refer a motion to a magistrate judge for the preparation of a report
and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(1). “A magistrate judge
must promptly conduct the required proceedings . . . [and] enter a recommended disposition,
including, if appropriate, proposed findings of fact.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(1). This Court must
“determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly
objected to.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). The Court need not review under
a de novo or any

1

Case 3:21-cv-00568-RGJ-RSE Document 24 Filed 01/18/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 523

other standard those aspects of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection is
made and may adopt the findings and rulings of the magistrate judge to which no specific objection
is filed Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150, 155 (1985).
Here, because no party has objected to the Report and Recommendation, the Court may
accept it without review. See Thomas, 474 U.S. at 150, 155. Nevertheless, the Court has conducted
its own review of the record and finds no error in the magistrate judge’s findings and conclusions.
Accordingly, and the Court being otherwise sufficiently advised, IT ORDERED as follows:
(1)

The Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate, [DE 23], is

ACCEPTED in whole and INCORPORATED by reference.
(2)

A separate judgment shall issue this date.

January 18, 2023

cc: Counsel of Record

2