Summary
reasoning ALJ satisfied Lamay obligations by actions including explaining to claimant "what was at stake, and offer[ing] to adjourn the hearing in order to afford her an opportunity to retain counsel."
Summary of this case from Chmielewski v. BerryhillOpinion
3:11-CV-1265 (LEK/DEP)
03-18-2013
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on February 25, 2013, by the Honorable David E. Peebles, United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Northern District of New York Local Rule 72.3(d). Dkt. No. 16 ("Report-Recommendation").
Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy of a magistrate judge's report-recommendation, the party "may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations." FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); N.D.N.Y. L.R. 72.1(c). "If no objections are filed . . . reviewing courts should review a report and recommendation for clear error." Edwards v. Fischer, 414 F. Supp. 2d 342, 346-47 (S.D.N.Y. 2006).
Here, no objections have been raised in the allotted time with respect to Magistrate Judge Peebles's Report-Recommendation. See generally Dkt. After a thorough review of the Report-Recommendation and the record, the Court has determined that the Report-Recommendation is not subject to attack for clear error or manifest injustice.
Accordingly, it is hereby:
ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 16) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED, that Defendant's Motion (Dkt. No. 15) for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED, that Plaintiff's Motion (Dkt. No. 12) for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED, and that the decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court serve a copy of this Order on the parties to this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: March 18, 2013
Albany, New York
________________________
Lawrence E. Kahn
U.S. District Judge