Montgomery v. Commissioner Of Social Security Administration

Filing 20

ORDER ADOPTING 19 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; denying Plaintiff's 10 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting Defendant's 13 Motion for Summary Judgment. It is ORDERED that this matter be DISMISSED with prejudice and stricken from the docket. The clerk is to enter a separate judgment in favor of the Deft. Signed by Chief Judge Gina M. Groh on 3/22/2017. (tlg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
MARTINSBURG

SANDRA MONTGOMERY,
Plaintiff,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:16-CV-46
(GROH)

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION,
Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On this day, the above-styled matter came before this Court for consideration of
the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Robert W.
Trumble [ECF No. 19], entered on March 3, 2017, to which neither party filed objections.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court is required to make a de novo
review of those portions of the R&R to which objection is made. However, failure to file
objections permits the district court to review the R&R under the standard that it believes
to be appropriate, and under this circumstance, the parties’ right to de novo review is
waived. See Webb v. Califano, 468 F. Supp. 825, 830-31 (E.D. Cal. 1979).
Pursuant to Magistrate Judge Trumble’s R&R, as well as 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C),
objections were due within fourteen days after entry of the R&R. Accordingly, because
no objections have been filed, this Court will review the R&R for clear error.
In this matter, Magistrate Judge Trumble found that substantial evidence supports
the findings of the administrative law judge (“ALJ”).

Specifically, Magistrate Judge

Trumble found that the ALJ’s determination that the Plaintiff was not disabled from
February 13, 2013, through the date of the ALJ’s November 26, 2014 decision, is
supported by substantial evidence and in accordance with social security regulations.
Accordingly, it is the opinion of this Court that Magistrate Judge Trumble’s Report
and Recommendation [ECF No. 19] should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED.
For the reasons more fully stated in the Report and Recommendation, this Court
ORDERS that the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 10] is DENIED and
the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 13] is GRANTED. The Court
further ORDERS that this matter be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and STRICKEN
from this Court’s active docket.
The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter a separate judgment in favor of the Defendant
and transmit copies of this Order to all counsel of record.
DATED: March 22, 2017

2