Werts v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 15

ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 14) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED, that the Commissioners decision is AFFIRMED; and it is further ORDERED, that Plaintiffs Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED; and it is further ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court close this case. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on November 13, 2014. (sas)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
LAWRENCE L. WERTS, JR.,
Plaintiff,
-against-

5:13-CV-0914 (LEK/ATB)

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
___________________________________
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on October
10, 2014, by the Honorable Andrew T. Baxter, U.S. Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3. Dkt. No. 14 (“Report-Recommendation”).
Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy of a magistrate judge’s reportrecommendation, the party “may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings
and recommendations.” FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); L.R. 72.1(c). If no objections are made, or if an
objection is general, conclusory, perfunctory, or a mere reiteration of an argument made to the
magistrate judge, a district court need review that aspect of a report-recommendation only for clear
error. Chylinski v. Bank of Am., N.A., 434 F. App’x 47, 48 (2d Cir. 2011); Barnes v. Prack, No.
11-CV-0857, 2013 WL 1121353, at *1 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2013); Farid v. Bouey, 554 F. Supp. 2d
301, 306-07 & n.2 (N.D.N.Y. 2008); see also Machicote v. Ercole, No. 06 Civ. 13320, 2011 WL
3809920, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 25, 2011) (“[E]ven a pro se party’s objections to a Report and
Recommendation must be specific and clearly aimed at particular findings in the magistrate’s
proposal, such that no party be allowed a second bite at the apple by simply relitigating a prior
argument.”).

No objections were filed in the allotted time period. See Docket. Accordingly, the Court
has reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear error and has found none.
Accordingly, it is hereby:
ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 14) is APPROVED and
ADOPTED in its entirety; 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; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court close this case; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court serve a copy of this Order on the parties in
accordance with the Local Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:

November 13, 2014
Albany, New York

2