From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Huebner v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
Sep 7, 2012
CASE NO. 8:10-CIV-872-T-17-AEP (M.D. Fla. Sep. 7, 2012)

Opinion

CASE NO. 8:10-CIV-872-T-17-AEP

09-07-2012

DOUG A. HUEBNER, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before the Court on the report and recommendation (R&R) issued by Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli on August 20, 2012 (Docket No. 16). The magistrate judge recommended that the Court affirm the decision of the Commissioner denying the plaintiff's claims for a period of disability.

Pursuant to Rule 6.02, Rules of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, the parties had fourteen (14) days after service to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations, or be barred from attacking the factual findings on appeal. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc). No timely objections to the report and recommendation were filed.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

When a party makes a timely and specific objection to a finding of fact in the report and recommendation, the district court should make a de novo review of the record with respect to that factual issue. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); U.S. v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667 (1980); Jeffrey S. v. State Board of Education of State of Georgia, 896 f.2d 507 (11th Cir. 1990). However, when no timely and specific objections are filed, case law indicates that the court should review the findings using a clearly erroneous standard. Gropp v. United Airlines, Inc., 817 F.Supp. 1558, 1562 (M.D. Fla. 1993).

The Court has reviewed the report and recommendation and made an independent review of the record. Upon due consideration, the Court concurs with the report and recommendation. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the report and recommendation, August 29, 2012 (Docket No. 16) be adopted and incorporated by reference; the Court affirms the decision of the Commissioner denying the plaintiff's claims for a period of disability. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment for the defendant and against the plaintiff, to close the case and terminate any pending motions.

DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this 7th day of August, 2012.

_________________

ELIZABETH A. KOVACHEVICH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies to:
All parties and counsel of record
Assigned Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Huebner v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
Sep 7, 2012
CASE NO. 8:10-CIV-872-T-17-AEP (M.D. Fla. Sep. 7, 2012)
Case details for

Huebner v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:DOUG A. HUEBNER, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

Date published: Sep 7, 2012

Citations

CASE NO. 8:10-CIV-872-T-17-AEP (M.D. Fla. Sep. 7, 2012)

Citing Cases

Mielbeck v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Passopulos, 976 F.2d at 646 (“The ALJ . . . must be allowed some leeway to evaluate how newly presented…

Gardner v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

The majority of the ALJ's decision relates to the period of time after May 20, 2017, and those broad…