Dority v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 16

DECISION & ORDER accepting and adopting # 15 Magistrate Judge Carter's Report and Recommendation in its entirety; the Commissioner's determination is AFFIRMED, and the Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed. Signed by Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 10/9/15. (lmw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
__________________________________________
MICHAEL J. DORITY,
Plaintiff,
v.

7:14-CV-00285
(GTS/WBC)

COMM’R OF SOC. SEC.,
Defendant.
__________________________________________
APPEARANCES:

OF COUNSEL:

CONBOY, McKAY LAW FIRM
Counsel for Plaintiff
307 State Street
Carthage, NY 13619

LAWRENCE D. HASSELER, ESQ.

U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMIN.
OFFICE OF REG’L GEN. COUNSEL – REGION II
Counsel for Defendant
26 Federal Plaza, Room 3904
New York, NY 10278

KAREN T. CALLAHAN, ESQ.

GLENN T. SUDDABY, Chief United States District Judge
DECISION and ORDER
Currently before the Court, in this Social Security action filed by Michael J. Dority
(“Plaintiff”) against the Commissioner of Social Security (“Defendant” or “the Commissioner”)
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3), is the Report and Recommendation of United
States Magistrate Judge William B. Mitchell Carter, filed September 15, 2015, recommending
that Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings be denied, and that Defendant’s motion for
judgment on the pleadings be granted. (Dkt. No. 15.) Objections to the Report and
Recommendation have not been filed.

A district court reviewing a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation “may
accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the
magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Parties may raise objections to the magistrate
judge’s Report and Recommendation, but they must be “specific written objections,” and must
be submitted “[w]ithin 14 days after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition.”
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2); accord, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). “Where, however, an objecting
‘party makes only conclusory or general objections, or simply reiterates his original arguments,
the Court reviews the Report and Recommendation only for clear error.’” Caldwell v. Crosset,
09- CV-0576, 2010 WL 2346330, at *1 (N.D.N.Y. June 9, 2010) (quoting Farid v. Bouey, 554 F.
Supp. 2d 301, 307 [N.D.N.Y. 2008]).
After carefully reviewing the filings in this action, the Court can find no clear error in the
Report and Recommendation. Magistrate Judge Carter employed the proper standards,
accurately recited the facts, and reasonably applied the law to those facts. (Dkt. No. 15.)
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Carter’s Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 15) is
ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that the Commissioner’s determination is AFFIRMED; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED.

Dated: October 9, 2015
Syracuse, New York
____________________________________
Hon. Glenn T. Suddaby
Chief, U.S. District Judge

2