Knorr v. Saul

Full title: BARRY LEE KNORR, JR., Plaintiff v. ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of Social…

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

Date published: Jun 24, 2019

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:18-CV-152 (M.D. Pa. Jun. 24, 2019)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:18-CV-152

06-24-2019

BARRY LEE KNORR, JR., Plaintiff v. ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant

Chief Judge Conner

( ) ORDER

AND NOW, this 24th day of June, 2019, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 13) of Magistrate Judge William I. Arbuckle, recommending that the court deny the appeal of plaintiff Barry Lee Knorr, Jr. ("Knorr"), from the decision of the administrative law judge denying his application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income, and it appearing that Knorr has not objected to the report, see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and the court noting 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 "reasoned consideration" to the uncontested portions of the report, E.E.O.C. v. City of Long Branch, 866 F.3d 93, 100 (3d Cir. 2017) (quoting Henderson, 812 F.2d at 879), 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 independent review of the record, the court being in agreement with Judge Arbuckle that the decision of the administrative law judge is "supported by substantial evidence," 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and concluding that there is no clear error on the face of the record, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. The report (Doc. 13) of Magistrate Judge Arbuckle is ADOPTED.

2. The decision of the Commissioner denying Knorr's application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income is AFFIRMED.

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

4. The Clerk of Court shall thereafter CLOSE this case.

/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER

Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge

United States District Court

Middle District of Pennsylvania