MATHEWS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

Filing 19

ORDER THAT THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO RETURN THIS MATTER TO THE COURT'S ACTIVE DOCKET. THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (DOC. NO. 18) IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED. THE PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR REVIEW IS DENIED; THE FINAL DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER IS AFFIRMED; AND THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO MARK THIS MATTER AS CLOSED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE EDWARD G. SMITH ON 8/31/17. 8/31/17 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. (ky, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
TRACEY A. MATHEWS,
Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-3717

ORDER
AND NOW, this 31st day of August, 2017, after considering the complaint (Doc. No. 3),
the answer (Doc. No. 7), and the administrative record (Doc. No. 6); and after considering the
report and recommendation filed by United States Magistrate Judge Thomas J. Rueter (Doc. No.
18); and after reviewing the plaintiff’s brief and statement of issues in support of the request for
review (Doc. No. 12), the defendant’s response to the request for review (Doc. No. 14), and the
plaintiff’s reply brief (Doc. No. 16); and no party having filed objections to the report and
recommendation; accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1.

The clerk of court is DIRECTED to return this matter to the court’s active

2.

The report and recommendation (Doc. No. 18) is APPROVED and ADOPTED; 1

3.

The plaintiff’s request for review is DENIED;

4.

The final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED; and

docket;

1

Since neither party filed objections to Magistrate Judge Rueter’s report and recommendation, the court need not
review the report before adopting it. Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987). Nonetheless, “the
better practice is for the district judge to afford some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report.”
Id. As such, the court will review the report for plain error. See Oldrati v. Apfel, 33 F. Supp. 2d 397, 399 (E.D. Pa.
1998) (“In the absence of a timely objection, . . . this Court will review [the magistrate judge’s] Report and
Recommendation for clear error.” (internal quotation marks omitted)). The court 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). The
court has reviewed Judge Rueter’s report for plain error and has found none.

5.

The clerk of court is DIRECTED to mark this matter as CLOSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Edward G. Smith
EDWARD G. SMITH, J.

2