Gerron v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Full title: SHARLENE GERRON Plaintiff v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant

Court: United States District Court, Western District of Kentucky

Date published: Apr 27, 2022

Civil Action 3:20-CV-831-RGJ-CHL (W.D. Ky. Apr. 27, 2022)

Opinion

Civil Action 3:20-CV-831-RGJ-CHL

04-27-2022

SHARLENE GERRON Plaintiff v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant

Rebecca Grady Jennings, District Judge

ORDER

Rebecca Grady Jennings, District Judge

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (the “R&R”) [DE 22] of United States Magistrate Judge Colin H. Lindsay recommending the ALJ's decision be affirmed. This matter was referred Magistrate Judge Lindsay pursuant to General Order No. 201417 to issue an R&R. [DE 6]. Sharlene Gerron (“Gerron”) filed a Complaint [DE 1] challenging the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”). Gerron filed a Fact and Law Summary [DE 16] and the Commissioner filed a Fact and Law Summary [DE 21]. On April 7, 2022, Magistrate Judge Lindsey issued an R&R, recommending that the decision of the ALJ be affirmed. [DE 22]. No objections were filed to the R&R within the applicable time. This matter is now ripe and for the reasons below, the Court ADOPTS the R&R.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, a district court may refer a pretrial matter to a magistrate judge for preparation of an R&R. “The magistrate judge must enter a recommended disposition, including, if appropriate, proposed findings of fact.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(1). This Court then must “determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3). The Court need not review under a de novo or any other standard those aspects of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection is made and may adopt the findings and rulings of the magistrate judge to which no specific objection is filed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150, 155 (1985).

Here, no objections were filed to the R&R. That said, the Court has conducted its own review of the record and finds no error in the magistrate judge's findings and conclusions. For these reasons, and the Court being otherwise sufficiently advised, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

(1) The Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, [DE 22], is ADOPTED in whole and INCORPORATED by reference;

(2) This matter is dismissed with prejudice and stricken from the Court's active docket.

(3) The Court will enter a separate judgment.

This is a final and appealable Order and there is no just cause for delay.