Clark v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 14

ORDER accepting the findings and recommendations set for in the U.S. Magistrate Judge's 13 Report and Recommendation filed 11/27/13. It is, therefore ORDERED that Plaintiff's 9 Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED and Defendant' s 11 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, as outlined. Accordingly, the decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED and Plaintiff's case is DISMISSED. (See Order for Specifics) Entered 1/13/14 and filed 1/14/14. (Signed by District Judge Raymond A. Jackson on 1/13/14). Copies provided on 1/14/14, as directed. (ecav, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUI T

FILED

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGIN

Norfolk Division

JAN 1 4 2014
SHERRY CLARK,

CLERK. OS C;S'-!C7CGuHT
• .'V

Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:13cv83

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
Defendant.

ORDER

Before the Court is the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation on Sherry Clark's
(Plaintiff) action for judicial review of the final decision of the Acting Commissioner of Social

Security ("Defendant") denying Plaintiffs claim for disability insurance benefits ('DIB") pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) and Rule 72(b), filed November 27, 2013. On April 18,
2013, this matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to the provisions of 28
U.S.C. Section 636(b)(1)(B), Rule 72(b) ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule 72 of the

Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia for a report and
recommendation.

On May 20, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Summary Judgment with

Memorandum in Support.

On June 17, 2013, Defendant filed a cross-motion for Summary

Judgment accompanied by a memorandum in support and in opposition to Plaintiffs motion. On
November 27,2013, the Magistrate Judge filed his report recommending that the Commissioner's

decision be AFFIRMED. By copy of the report, each party was advised of their right to file
written objections to the findings and recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. The

y

Court has received no objections to the report and the time for filing the same has expired.
The Court does hereby accept the findings and recommendations set forth in the report of

the United States Magistrate Judge filed November 27,2013, and it is, therefore ORDERED that
Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs Motion for Summary

Judgment is DENIED. Accordingly, the decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED and
Plaintiffs case is DISMISSED.

The Clerk shall mail acopy ofthis final Order to counsel for both parties.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Raymond A. Jackson
United States District Judge
Norfolk, Virginia

January/3 ,2014