Jackson v. Commissioner of Social Security
DECISION AND ORDER accepting and adopting # 13 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter in its entirety. Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied; defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted. The Commissioner's decision is affirmed, and the plaintiff's complaint is dismissed. Signed by Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 5/15/15. (lmw)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
LAURIE ANN JACKSON,
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
CLARK JORDAN PEZZINO
Counsel for Plaintiff
1207 Delaware Ave., Suite 202
Buffalo, New York 14209
AMANDA R. JORDAN, ESQ.
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF REG’L GEN. COUNSEL–REGION II
Counsel for Defendant
26 Federal Plaza, Room 3904
New York, New York 10278
MONIKA K. CRAWFORD, ESQ.
GLENN T. SUDDABY, United States District Judge
DECISION and ORDER
The above matter comes to this Court following a Report-Recommendation by United
States Magistrate Andrew T. Baxter, filed on April 7, 2015, recommending that the
Commissioner’s decision be affirmed and Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed. (Dkt. No. 13.)
Objections to the Report-Recommendation have not been filed and the time in which to do so
has expired. (See generally Docket Sheet.) After carefully reviewing all of the papers herein,
including Magistrate Judge Baxter’s thorough Report-Recommendation, the Court can find no
clear error in the Report-Recommendation.1 As a result, the Report-Recommendation is
accepted and adopted in its entirety; and Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed in its entirety.
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Baxter’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 13) is
ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 11) is
DENIED; and it is further
ORDERED that Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 12) is
GRANTED; and it is further
ORDERED that the Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED.
Dated: May 15, 2015
Syracuse, New York
When no objection is made to a report-recommendation, the Court subjects that
report-recommendation to only a clear error review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee
Notes: 1983 Addition. When performing such a “clear error” review, “the court need only
satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the
recommendation.” Id.; see also Batista v. Walker, 94-CV-2826, 1995 WL 453299, at *1
(S.D.N.Y. July 31, 1995) (Sotomayor, J.) (“I am permitted to adopt those sections of [a
magistrate judge's] report to which no specific objection is made, so long as those sections are
not facially erroneous.”) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
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?