Gibbs v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of
ORDER accepting and adopting 17 Report and Recommendations; denying 12 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 15 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Harry S Mattice, Jr on 8/28/17. (aws, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, )
Case No. 4:16-cv-40
Magistrate Judge Lee
On August 2, 2017, United States Magistrate Judge Susan K. Lee filed a Report and
Recommendation (Doc. 17) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 72(b). Magistrate Judge Lee recommended that (1) Plaintiff’s Motion for
Summary Judgment be denied; (2) Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment be
granted; and (3) the Commissioner’s decision denying benefits be affirmed. (Doc. 17 at
Plaintiff has filed no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation.1 Nevertheless, the Court has reviewed the record in this matter, and it
agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s well-reasoned conclusions.
Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Lee’s findings
of fact and conclusions of law. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 12) is
Magistrate Judge Lee specifically advised Plaintiff that she had 14 days in which to object to the Report
and Recommendation and that failure to do so would waive her right to appeal. (Doc. 17 at 20); see Fed. R.
Civ. P. 72(b)(2); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 148-51 (1985) (noting that “[i]t does not appear that
Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de
novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings”).
hereby DENIED, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 15) is hereby
GRANTED, and this action is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
SO ORDERED this 28th day of August, 2017.
/s/ Harry S. Mattice, Jr._______
HARRY S. MATTICE, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?