From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bennett v. Colvin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Aug 29, 2016
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15-0669 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 29, 2016)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15-0669

08-29-2016

AMANDA ROSE BENNETT, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.


( MANNION, D.J. )
(COHN, M.J.) MEMORANDUM

Pending before the court is the report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Gerald B. Cohn, (Doc. 17), which recommends that the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner") denying plaintiff's applications for supplemental security income ("SSI") and disability insurance benefits ("DIB") under the Social Security Act ("Act"), 42 U.S.C. §§401-433, 1382-1383, be affirmed, and that plaintiff's appeal, (Doc. 1), be denied. Neither the plaintiff nor the defendant have objected to Judge Cohn's report and recommendation, and the time within which to do so has expired.

Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, the court should, as a matter of good practice, "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see also Univac Dental Co . v. Dentsply Intern., Inc., 702 F.Supp.2d 465, 469 (2010) (citing Henderson v . Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987) (explaining judges should give some review to every Report and Recommendation)). Nevertheless, whether timely objections are made or not, the district court may accept, not accept, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.31.

Judge Cohn has thoroughly reviewed the record in this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §405(g), and he has determined that there is substantial evidence to support the Commissioner's decision that the plaintiff could perform a range of work at all exertional levels with normal breaks, but with nonexertional limitations, despite her severe impairment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. The court has reviewed each of the recommended bases presented by Judge Cohn for denying the plaintiff's appeal. Because the court agrees with the sound reasoning that led Judge Cohn to the conclusions in the report and finds no clear error on the face of the record, the court will adopt the report in its entirety. An appropriate order shall issue.

/s/ _________

MALACHY E. MANNION

United States District Judge Date: August 29, 2016
O:\Mannion\shared\MEMORANDA - DJ\CIVIL MEMORANDA\2015 MEMORANDA\15-0669-01.wpd


Summaries of

Bennett v. Colvin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Aug 29, 2016
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15-0669 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 29, 2016)
Case details for

Bennett v. Colvin

Case Details

Full title:AMANDA ROSE BENNETT, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Aug 29, 2016

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15-0669 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 29, 2016)