Opinion
15-CV-525 (AJN)
06-06-2016
Sharon Filichko, Plaintiff, v. Carolyn Colvin, Defendant(s).
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION :
Presently before the Court is the April 27, 2016 Report and Recommendation ("Report") of United States Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn. Dkt. No. 29. Plaintiff in this social security action filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings in August 2015 and Defendant filed a cross motion for judgment on the pleadings in December 2015. Dkt. Nos. 15, 23. In her Report, Judge Netburn granted Defendant's motion and denied Plaintiff's motion. Dkt. No. 29 at 17.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, "[w]ithin fourteen days after being served with a copy [of a report and recommendation], any party may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) ("Within 14 days after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition, a party may serve and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations."). The Court "shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Judge Netburn's Report advised the parties of the deadline to file objections, Dkt. No. 29 at 18, but no objections have been received to date. If "no specific written objection is made, the district court may adopt [the report and recommendation] as long as the factual and legal basis supporting the findings and conclusions set forth . . . are not clearly erroneous or contrary to law." Norman v. Astrue, 912 F. Supp. 2d 33, 39 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (quoting Eisenberg v. New England Motor Freight, Inc., 564 F. Supp. 2d 224, 226 (S.D.N.Y. 2008)) (internal quotation marks omitted). Upon a careful review of Judge Netburn's well-reasoned Report and Recommendation, the Court finds no clear error and hereby adopts the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The Court therefore grants Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings and denies Plaintiff's cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings.
This resolves Dkt. Nos. 15, 23. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case.
SO ORDERED. Dated: June 6, 2016
New York, New York
/s/_________
ALISON J. NATHAN
United States District Judge