PEREZ v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE

Filing 17

ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE HONORABLE ELIZABETH T. HEY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (DOC. NO. 16) IS ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY. THE COMMISSIONER'S DECISION DENYING PLAINTIFF'S APPLICATION FOR DIB AND SSI IS AFFIRMED. THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO CLOSE THE CASE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY HONORABLE C. DARNELL JONES, II ON 4/21/2014. 4/22/2014 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. (aeg, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA DACIO PEREZ, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. : : : : : : : : : : CIVIL ACTION NO.: 12-CV-5570-CDJ ORDER AND NOW, this 21st day of April, 2014, it is hereby ORDERED: 1.) the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable Elizabeth T. Hey, United States Magistrate Judge, (Doc. No. 16), is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY;1 2.) The Commissioner’s decision denying Plaintiff’s application for DIB and SSI is AFFIRMED; 3.) The clerk of court is directed to CLOSE THE CASE for statistical purposes. BY THE COURT: /s/ C. Darnell Jones, II J. C. DARNELL JONES, II J. 1 When timely objections are filed to the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge, the district court must review de novo those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made. 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1). If there are no objections to the report and recommendation or when reviewing those portions of the report and recommendation to which no objections are directed, the court should, as a matter of good practice, “satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see also Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987). Plaintiff did not file timely objections, so the court has reviewed the report and recommendation for clear error.

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?