LEACH v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Filing
19
ORDER signed by CHIEF JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR on 09/25/2015, that the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (Doc. 13 ) is ADOPTED. FURTHER that Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Doc. 7 ) is DENIED , that Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Doc. 11 ) is GRANTED, that the Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED, and that this action be dismissed with prejudice. A Judgment dismissing this action will be entered contemporaneously with this Order. (Taylor, Abby)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CARVIN LEACH,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of Social
Security,
Defendant.
1:14CV847
ORDER
This matter is before this court for review of the
Memorandum Opinion and Recommendation (“Recommendation”) filed
on August 14, 2015, by the Magistrate Judge in accordance with
28 U.S.C. § 636(b).
(Doc. 13.)
In the Recommendation, the
Magistrate Judge recommends that the Commissioner’s decision be
affirmed, that Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings
(Doc. 7) be denied, that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment
(Doc. 11) be granted, and that this action be dismissed with
prejudice.
The Recommendation was served on the parties to this
action on August 14, 2015 (Doc. 14).
Counsel for Plaintiff
filed timely objections (Doc. 15) to the Recommendation, and
counsel for the Commissioner filed a response to Plaintiff’s
objections (Doc. 18).
This court is required to “make a de novo determination of
those portions of the [Magistrate Judge’s] report or specified
proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
This court “may accept, reject, or
modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations
made by the [M]agistrate [J]udge. . . . [O]r recommit the matter
to the [M]agistrate [J]udge with instructions.”
Id.
This court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the
Recommendation to which objection was made and has made a de
novo determination which is in accord with the Magistrate
Judge’s Recommendation.
This court therefore adopts the
Recommendation.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s
Recommendation (Doc. 13) is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that
Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Doc. 7) is
DENIED, that Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings
(Doc. 11) is GRANTED, that the Commissioner’s decision is
AFFIRMED, and that this action be dismissed with prejudice.
A Judgment dismissing this action will be entered
contemporaneously with this Order.
- 2 -
This the 25th day of September, 2015.
_______________________________________
United States District Judge
- 3 -
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?