From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ayende v. Astrue

United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, at Winchester
Mar 3, 2009
Case No. 4:08-cv-19 (E.D. Tenn. Mar. 3, 2009)

Opinion

Case No. 4:08-cv-19.

March 3, 2009


ORDER


United States Magistrate William B. Carter filed his Report and Recommendation [Court Doc. 14] pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Plaintiff has filed timely objections. (Court Doc. 15.)

The Court has reviewed de novo those portion of Magistrate Judge Carter's Report and Recommendation to which an objection has been made. Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 72(b). The Court finds that Plaintiff's objections raise no new arguments but are simply a reargument of issues previously raised on summary judgment and which were fully addressed in the Report and Recommendation. The Court finds that further analysis of these same arguments would be merely cumulative and is unwarranted in light of Magistrate Judge Carter's well-reasoned and well-supported Report and Recommendation.

Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Carter's findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations pursuant to § 636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b). Plaintiff's objections [Court Doc. 14] are OVERRULED. Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record [Court Doc. 10] is DENIED. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Court Doc. 12] is GRANTED. The Commissioner's denial of benefits is AFFIRMED and the instant action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk shall close the case.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Ayende v. Astrue

United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, at Winchester
Mar 3, 2009
Case No. 4:08-cv-19 (E.D. Tenn. Mar. 3, 2009)
Case details for

Ayende v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:MARY ANNE AYENDE, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, at Winchester

Date published: Mar 3, 2009

Citations

Case No. 4:08-cv-19 (E.D. Tenn. Mar. 3, 2009)

Citing Cases

Pollard v. Astrue

The Commissioner argues that the ALJ's analysis of Listing 9.08A should be affirmed as currently written…

Miller v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Absent such results, plaintiff cannot meet the Listing. See e.g., Ayende v. Astrue, 2009 WL 537221, *7…