Wytrwa v. Colvin

Filing 16

ORDER adopting 15 Report and Recommendations. The Commissioner's decision is Affirmed and the complaint is Dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge Brenda K. Sannes on 5/19/16. (rjb, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
_____________________________________________
WENDY LOU WYTRWA,
Plaintiff,
v.

5:15-CV-0286 (BKS/ATB)

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
_____________________________________________
Appearances:
Howard D. Olinsky
Olinsky Law Group
One Park Place
300 S. State Street, Ste. 420
Syracuse, NY 13202
For Plaintiff
Richard S. Hartunian, United States Attorney
David Brown, Special Assistant United States Attorney
Social Security Administration
Office of Regional General Counsel
Region II
26 Federal Plaza - Room 3904
New York, NY 10278
For Defendant
Hon. Brenda K. Sannes, United States District Judge:
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Wendy Lou Wytrwa filed this action under 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3)
seeking review of Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her applications for Supplemental
Security Income Benefits and Disability Insurance Benefits. Dkt. No. 1. This matter was referred

to United States Magistrate Judge Andrew T. Baxter for a Report-Recommendation. Dkt. No. 3;
Local Rule 73.2(d). On April 28, 2018, after reviewing the parties’ briefs, Dkt. Nos. 11, 14, and
the Administrative Transcript, Dkt. No. 9, Magistrate Judge Baxter issued a ReportRecommendation recommending that the Commissioner’s decision be affirmed and plaintiff’s
complaint be dismissed. Dkt. No. 15, p. 23. Magistrate Judge Baxter advised the parties that
under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), they had “14 days within which to file written objections” to the
Report-Recommendation and that “failure to object to th[e] report within 14 days will preclude
appellate review.” Dkt. No. 15, p. 23 (citing Roldan v. Racette, 984 F.2d 85 (2d Cir. 1993); 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, 6(a), 6(e)).
DISCUSSION
The Court reviews de novo those portions of the Magistrate Judge’s findings and
recommendations that have been properly preserved with a specific objection. Petersen v.
Astrue, 2 F. Supp. 3d 223, 228-29 (N.D.N.Y. 2012); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Findings and
recommendations as to which there was no properly preserved objection are reviewed for clear
error. Id.
Neither of the parties has raised any objection to Magistrate Judge Baxter’s ReportRecommendation. The Court has reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear error and
found none. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Baxter’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 15) is
ADOPTED in all respects; and it is further
ORDERED that the Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED; and it is further

2

ORDERED that the Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice; and it is
further
ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 19, 2016

3