Thompson v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
20
OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING 19 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION denying 11 Plaintiff's Motion for Order Reversing the Decision of the Commissioner, granting 14 Defendant's Motion for Order Affirming the Decision of the Commissioner. Signed by Chief Judge Christina Reiss on 12/12/2014. (pac)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
DISTRICT OF VERMONT
U.S. 01STRlCT COURT
DISTRICT OF VERt-10tH
FILED
201~DEC12
PH f:59
CLER'
TIFFANY AMANDA THOMPSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 5:13-cv-275
OPINION AND O@ER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
(Docs. 11, 14 & 19)
This matter came before the court for a review of the Magistrate Judge's October
16, 2014 Report and Recommendation ("R & R"). Plaintiff has filed a motion to reverse
the decision of the Commissioner. (Doc. 11.) Defendant opposes the motion and has
filed a cross motion for an order affirming the decision of the Commissioner. (Doc. 14.)
Neither party has objected to the R & R, and the deadline for doing so has expired.
A district judge must make a de novo determination of those portions of a
magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which an objection is made. Fed. R.
Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l); Cullen v. United States, 194 F.3d 401, 405 (2d Cir.
1999). The district judge 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)(l); accord
Cullen, 194 F.3d at 405. A district judge, however, is not required to review the factual
or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of a report and
recommendation to which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140,
150 ( 1985). When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there
is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation. See
Campbell v. United States Dist. Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974), cert. denied,
419
u.s. 879 (1974).
In his twenty-nine page R & R, the Magistrate Judge carefully reviewed the
factual record and discussed it in some detail with regard to each of this issues raised in
this appeal. The Magistrate Judge's conclusions are supported by the record and are
well-reasoned. On this basis, the R & R is adopted.
For the foregoing reasons, the court hereby ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's
R & R as the court's Opinion and Order, and DENIES Plaintiffs motion to reverse
decision ofthe Commissioner (Doc. 11), and GRANTS the Defendant's motion for order
affirming the decision of the Commissioner (Doc. 14 ).
SO ORDERED.
~
Dated at Burlington, in the District of Vermont, this ___il_ day ofDecember, 2014.
Chnstina Reiss, Chief Judge
United States District Court
2
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?