Hansen-Nilsen v. Colvin
DECISION AND ORDER accepting and adopting # 18 Magistrate Judge Carter's Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The Commissioner's decision denying disability benefits is affirmed, and the Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed. Signed by Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 3/6/17. (lmw)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
LAW OFFICE OF BARNEY F. BILELLO
Counsel for Plaintiff
4020 Underbrush Trail
Liverpool, New York 13090
BARNEY F. BILELLO, ESQ.
STANLEY LAW OFFICES, LLP
Co-Counsel for Plaintiff
215 Burnet Avenue
Syracuse, New York 13203
JAYA A. SHURTLIFF, ESQ.
STEPHANIE VISCELLI, ESQ.
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
KAREN T. CALLAHAN, ESQ.
OFFICE OF REG’L GEN. COUNSEL–REGION II
Counsel for Defendant
26 Federal Plaza, Room 3904
New York, New York 10278
GLENN T. SUDDABY, Chief United States District Judge
DECISION and ORDER
The above matter comes to this Court following a Report-Recommendation by United
States Magistrate Judge William B. Mitchell Carter, filed on February 7, 2017, recommending
that the Commissioner’s decision denying disability insurance benefits be affirmed and this
matter be dismissed. (Dkt. No. 18.) 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 Carter’s thorough ReportRecommendation, the Court can find no clear error in the Report-Recommendation.1 Magistrate
Judge Carter employed the proper legal standards, accurately recited the facts, and correctly
applied the law to those facts. (Dkt. No. 18.) As a result, the Report-Recommendation is
accepted and adopted in its entirety; the Commissioner’s decision denying disability insurance
benefits is affirmed; and this matter is dismissed.
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Carter’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 18) is
ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that the Commissioner’s decision denying disability insurance benefits is
AFFIRMED, and Plaintiff’s Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED.
Dated: March 7, 2017
Syracuse, New York
HON. GLENN T. SUDDABY
Chief United States District Judge
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 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?