Lawson et al v. Social Security Administration
ORDER adopting 20 Memorandum and Recommendations. Signed by US District Judge Terrence W. Boyle on 6/30/2017. Certified copy sent via US Mail to 3409 Scott Street, Kinston, NC 28504. (Stouch, L.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
JESSICA NIKITA LAWSON, on behalf of
J.N.F., a minor child,
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
This matter is before the Court on the Memorandum and Recommendation ("M&R") of
United States Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Swank, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C) and
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). [DE 20]. For the following reasons, the Court adopts the M&R.
Plaintiff protectively filed an application for SSI on February 28, 2012, alleging disability
beginning April 19, 2008. The application was denied initially and upon reconsideration, and a
request for hearing was filed. On September 29, 2014, a hearing was held before Administrative
Law Judge Wanda L. Wright, who
an unfavorable ruling on March 19, 2015. On June 10,
2016, the Appeals Council denied review.
On August 4, 2016, plaintiff filed for judicial review of the final administrative decision
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and requested that she be permitted to proceed informa pauperis
("IFP"). [DE 1]. The Court granted plaintiff's IFP motion on August 25, 2016, and the complaint
was docketed the same day. [DE 6, 7]. On December 7, 2016, the Court issued a notice
informing the parties that the matter would proceed by motions for judgment on the pleadings
and outlining the timelines for filing said motions. [DE 19]. No further action was taken by either
plaintiff or defendant, and the time for the filing of plaintiff's motion for judgment on the
pleadings expired on February 6, 2017.
On May 17, 2017, Magistrate Judge Swank entered an M&R recommending that the
Court issue an order requiring plaintiff to show cause, if any, why she should not be removed
from the case and a guardian ad litem appointed to represent the interests of the minor child in
this matter. [DE 20]. Magistrate Judge Swank further recommended that, in the event the Court
finds either that plaintiff does not meet the standard described in 20 C.F.R. § 416.1505 or that
other reasons exist for plaintiff's removal, that the Court appoint a guardian ad litem to protect
the interests of the minor pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2). Id. No objections to the M&R
were filed within the time allowed.
"The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to make a de nova determination of
those portions of the magistrate judge's report or specified proposed findings or
recommendations to which objection is made." Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416
F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (emphasis, alteration, and quotation omitted); see 28 U.S.C.
636(b). Absent timely objection, "a district court need not conduct a de nova review, but instead
must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the
recommendation." Diamond, 416 F.3d at 315 (quotation omitted).
Here, despite being warned as to the consequences, plaintiff made no objection to the
M&R. Having considered the M&R and record, the Court is satisfied that there is no clear error
on the face of the record and accepts the Magistrate Judge's recommendation.
For the foregoing reasons, the Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's M&R in its
entirety. [DE 20]. Accordingly, plaintiff is ORDERED to show cause, if any, why she should not
be removed from the case and a guardian ad litem appointed to represent the interests of the
minor child in this matter. Plaintiff shall have until July 31, 2017 to file such notice with the
this~ day ofri~ 17.
JRRENCE w. BOYLE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?