Hiser v. Astrue

Filing 17

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: adopting the 16 Proposed Findings and Recommendations; denying Plaintiff's 12 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings; granting Defendant's 15 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings; affirming the final decision of the Commissioner; dismissing this action from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 9/21/2009. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (slr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA BECKLEY DIVISION SHANNON M. HISER, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Shannon Hiser brings this action under 42 U.S.C. 401-433, 1381-1383f seeking review of the Commissioner of Social Security's final decision denying Plaintiff's application for Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act. By Standing Order entered on August 1, 2006, and filed in this case on July 23, 2008, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation (PF&R) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B). Magistrate Judge VanDervort filed his PF&R on August 31, 2009 [Docket 16]. In that filing, the magistrate judge recommended that this Court deny Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Docket 12], grant Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Docket 15], affirm the final decision of the Commissioner, and dismiss this action from the Court's docket. The Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the findings or recommendation to which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). In addition, failure CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:08-cv-00941 to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and Plaintiff's right to appeal this Court's Order. Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Here, objections to Magistrate Judge VanDervort's PF&R were due by September 18, 2009, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). To date, no objections have been filed. Having reviewed the PF&R [Docket 16] filed by Magistrate Judge VanDervort, the Court ADOPTS the recommendations contained therein, DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Docket 12], GRANTS Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Docket 15], AFFIRMS the final decision of the Commissioner, and DISMISSES this action from the Court's docket. A separate Judgment Order will enter this day implementing the rulings contained herein. IT IS SO ORDERED. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party. ENTER: September 21, 2009 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?