Reavis v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 23

FINAL ORDER granting 11 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 13 Motion to Dismiss; adopting 19 Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge; Any appeal must be filed within 60 days. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Hudson on 2/10/14. (kyou, )(copy mailed to Pro Se party)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

I

Richmond Division

FEB I 0 2014

CLERK, U.S. DiSTRICT COURT
RICHMOND, VA

TRACIE REAVIS,

pro se Plaintiff,

Civil No. 3:13-cv-149-HEH

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,

Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
FINAL ORDER

(Overruling Objections to and Adopting Report and Recommendation)

THIS MATTER is before the Court on a Report and Recommendation, pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), filed by the Honorable David J. Novak, United States

Magistrate Judge, on December 4, 2013. Tracie Reavis ("Plaintiff), who proceeds pro
se, has filed an objection thereto. Because the issues are adequately addressed in the

briefs, and oral argument would not materially aid the Court in the decisional process, no

oral argument is necessary at this time.
Having reviewed both the record and the Magistrate Judge's Report and
Recommendation in this case, this Court finds no clear error in Judge Novak's findings of

fact or conclusions of law. Accordingly, and based upon all of the facts in the record
before the Court, it appears that (1) the Commissioner's decision was supported by
substantial evidence in the record; and that (2) Plaintiff was not disabled according to the
regulations.

u

Accordingly, this Court hereby ADOPTS the December 4, 2013 Report and
Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. In accordance with that Report and

Recommendation, the Court hereby DENIES Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment1
(ECF No. 13) and GRANTS Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 11).

Any appeal from this decision must be taken by filing a written notice of appeal
with the Clerk of the Court within sixty (60) days of the date of entry hereof. Failure to

file a timely notice of appeal may result in the loss of the right to appeal.
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order and the accompanying

memorandum opinion to all counsel of record and to Plaintiff who appears pro se.
It is so ORDERED.

#

/s/

Henry E. Hudson
United States District Judge

Datei^Zk Ifl 2>0k<i
Richmond, VA

1As the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation notes,pro se Plaintiffs motion is
styled "Motion to Dismiss and Response to Roseboro Notice." (ECF No. 13.) "A document
filed pro se is 'to be liberally construed.'" Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (quoting
Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104-05 (1976)). Although not filed as a Motion for Summary

Judgment, Plaintiff asks the Court to "enter an order affirming a favorable decision on [her]
behalf." (PL's Mem. at 1.) Specifically, Plaintiff asks for the Court to review the Administrative
Law Judge's decision that her impairments do not meet listing level severity. (PL's Mem. at 1.)
The Court, therefore, will treat Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss and Response to Roseboro Notice"
as a motion for summary judgment.