FITZGERALD v. ASTRUE

Filing 10

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Complaint filed by BRIAN KEITH FITZGERALD, 7 Administrative Record, filed by MICHAEL J. ASTRUE. JUDGMENT WILL BE ENTERED AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY DENYING DISABILITY BENEFITS AND THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL MARK THIS CASE CLOSED FOR ALL PURPOSES, INCLUDING STATISTICS. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GENE E.K. PRATTER ON 2/28/13. 3/4/13 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(rab, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
BRIAN KEITH FITZGERALD,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Commissioner of the Social Security Administration,
Defendant.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 12-4145

ORDER
AND NOW, this 28th day of February, 2013, upon independent consideration of the
complaint and administrative record, 1 and after careful review of the Report and
Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David R. Strawbridge (Doc. No. 9), to
which no objections were filed pursuant to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 72.1.IV, it is hereby
ORDERED that:
1.

The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED AND ADOPTED;

2.

Judgment will be entered AFFIRMING the decision of the Commissioner of
Social Security denying disability benefits;

3.

The Clerk of Court shall mark this case CLOSED for all purposes, including
statistics.
BY THE COURT:
S/Gene E.K. Pratter
GENE E.K. PRATTER
United States District Judge

1

Plaintiff, who is represented by counsel, initiated this action by filing a complaint July 20, 2012, seeking review of
a final administrative decision of Defendant Commissioner denying Plaintiff’s 2009 claim for disability benefits.
The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Strawbridge for a Report & Recommendation [Doc. No. 3]. Pursuant
to the Procedural Order for Social Security Review issued by this Court on September 5, 2012 [Doc. No. 4],
Defendant filed and served an answer and a certified copy of the administrative record on September 25, 2012 [Doc.
Nos. 5-7]. Pursuant to the Procedural Order, Plaintiff was to file his Brief & Statement of Issues in Support of
Request for Review within 45 days of service of Defendant’s answer; however, Plaintiff did not file such a brief,
which would have been due on or about November 12, 2012. On January 15, 2013, more than 100 days after service
of Defendant’s answer, Judge Strawbridge issued an Order directing Plaintiff to submit a brief or show cause by
January 25, 2013, why the matter should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution, or submitted for determination
without the benefit of a brief [Doc. No. 8]. As of the date of this Order, Plaintiff has failed to respond or submit any
brief in support of his request for review. Nonetheless, Judge Strawbridge did not dismiss the matter for lack of
prosecution, but assessed the merits of Plaintiff’s request for review on the available record documents.