From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Iturralde v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Mar 23, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-1597 (M.D. Pa. Mar. 23, 2018)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-1597

03-23-2018

LEIDA ITURRALDE, Plaintiff v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant


( ) ORDER

AND NOW, this 23rd day of March, 2018, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 15) of Chief Magistrate Judge Susan E. Schwab, recommending that the court deny the appeal of plaintiff Leida Iturralde ("Iturralde") from the decision of the administrative law judge denying Iturralde's application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits, and it appearing that Iturralde did not object to the report, see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and the court observing that failure of a party to timely object to a magistrate judge's conclusions "may result in forfeiture of de novo review at the district court level," Nara v. Frank, 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007) (citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878-79 (3d Cir. 1987)), but that, as a matter of good practice, a district court should "afford some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report," Henderson, 812 F.2d at 878; see also Taylor v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 83 F. Supp. 3d 625, 626 (M.D. Pa. 2015) (citing Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Int'l, Inc., 702 F. Supp. 2d 465, 469 (M.D. Pa. 2010)), in order to "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record," FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes, and, following an independent review of the record, the court being in agreement with Judge Schwab that the decision of the administrative law judge is "supported by substantial evidence," 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Fargnoli v. Massanari, 247 F.3d 34, 38 (3d Cir. 2001), and concluding that there is no clear error on the face of the record, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. The report (Doc. 15) of Chief Magistrate Judge Schwab is ADOPTED.

2. The decision of the Commissioner denying Iturralde's application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits is AFFIRMED.

3. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of the Commissioner and against Iturralde as set forth in paragraph 2.

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER

Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge

United States District Court

Middle District of Pennsylvania


Summaries of

Iturralde v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Mar 23, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-1597 (M.D. Pa. Mar. 23, 2018)
Case details for

Iturralde v. Berryhill

Case Details

Full title:LEIDA ITURRALDE, Plaintiff v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Mar 23, 2018

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-1597 (M.D. Pa. Mar. 23, 2018)

Citing Cases

Moon v. Berryhill

(Doc. 11, at 6); (Tr. 27). However, in Iturralde v. Berryhill, No. 3:16-CV-01597, 2018 WL 1465273, at *6…

Mia A. v. Kijakazi

ient psychiatric intervention or any other significant treatment, and that she generally showed intact…