Makurat v. Astrue

Filing 34

ORDER denying 28 Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and granting 30 Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 8/15/2012. (Sawyer, D.)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION No.S:11-CV-34S-D ELIZABETH JANE MAKURAT, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER On July 19,2012, Magistrate Judge Gates issued a Memorandum and Recommendation ("M&R") [D.E. 33]. In the M&R, Judge Gates recommended that the court deny plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings [D.E. 28], grant defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings [D.E. 30], and affirm the Commissioner's final decision. Neither party filed objections to the M&R. "The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to make a de novo determination of those portions ofthe [magistrate judge's] report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to wbich objection is made." Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310,315 (4th Cir. 2005) (alteration in original) (emphasis and quotation omitted). Absent a timely objection, "a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face ofthe record in order to accept the recommendation." Id. (quotation omitted). The court has reviewed the M&R, the record, and the briefs. The court is satisfied that there is no clear error on the face of the record. Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings [D.E. 28] is DENIED, defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings [D.E. 30] is GRANTED, the defendant's final decision is AFFIRMED, and this action is DISMISSED. The clerk shall close the case. SO ORDERED. This J..S.. day of August 2012. 2

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?