Akers v. Berryhill

Filing 16

ORDER denying 11 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 13 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting 15 Report and Recommendations. Accordingly, the final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED. Signed by District Judge Raymond A. Jackson on 06/01/2018. (Copies distributed as directed 6/4/18.) (jjon)

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

JUN -4 2018

Newport News Division
C,

CATHY AKERS,
Plaintiff,
V.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:17cv89

NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF

SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

ORDER

Beforethe Court is the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation on Cathy Akers's

("Plaintiff') action forjudicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security

("Defendant") denying Plaintiffs claim for disability and disability insurance benefits ('DIB").
On October 2, 2017, this matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to the

provisions of 28 U.S.C. Section 636(b)(1)(B) and (C), Rule 72(b) of the 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 recorrunendation. On November 15, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Motion for
Summary Judgment and accompanying memorandum. (ECF Nos. 11 & 12). On December 15,
2017, Defendant filed a Motion for Summary Judgment and accompanying memorandum. (ECF

Nos. 13 & 14). On May 4, 2018, the Magistrate Judge filed his report recommending that
Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment be DENIED, that Defendant's Motion for Summary

Judgment be GRANTED, and the Commissioner's final decision be AFFIRMED. By copy of
the report, the parties were advised of their right to file written objections to the findings and

recommendations ofthe Magistrate Judge. The 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 May 4, 2018, and it is, therefore ORDERED that
Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED and Defendant's Motion for Sunmiary

Judgment is GRANTED. Accordingly, the final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED.
The Clerk shall mail a copy of this final Order to counsel for both Parties.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Norfolk, Virginia

June / ,2018

R^'mond A. Jackson

United States District Judas