Cotter v. Comm'r, Soc. Sec. Admin.

Full title: Hannah M. Cotter, Plaintiff, v. Commissioner, Social Security…

Court: United States District Court, Northern District of Texas

Date published: Aug 31, 2022

4:21-cv-0748-P (N.D. Tex. Aug. 31, 2022)

Opinion

4:21-cv-0748-P

08-31-2022

Hannah M. Cotter, Plaintiff, v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendant.

MARK T. PITTMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

MARK T. PITTMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This is an action seeking review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying Plaintiff Hannah M. Cotter's application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) under Title II of the Social Security Act. See ECF No. 1. This action was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge Jeffrey L. Cureton for submission to this Court of findings, conclusions and recommendations (“FCR”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). On August 10, 2022, Judge Cureton submitted Findings and Conclusions and recommended that the Court affirm the Commissioner's decision. See ECF No. 19. Objections to Judge Cureton's FCR were due on August 24, 2022. Id. Plaintiff submitted a filing to the Court on August 22, 2022.

“Parties filing objections must specifically identify those findings [to which they object]. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections need not be considered by the district court.” Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404, 410 n.8 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc), overruled on other grounds by Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1412 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc). Here, Plaintiffs filing-even liberally construed-fails to identify the findings to which they object liberally. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (“A document filed pro se is to be liberally construed....”). Despite this and in the interest of justice, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the purported objections in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the FCR of the United States Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 19), the Court concludes that the Plaintiff's objections are without merit. Therefore, the Court ACCEPTS the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Conclusions as its own. Accordingly, the Court AFFIRMS the final decision of the Commissioner and DISMISSES this action.

SO ORDERED.