From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davis v. Astrue

United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, at Greeneville
Aug 26, 2009
Case No. 2:08-cv-218 (E.D. Tenn. Aug. 26, 2009)

Opinion

Case No. 2:08-cv-218.

August 26, 2009


ORDER


United States Magistrate Judge William B. Mitchell Carter filed his report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) on August 4, 2009 [Court Doc. 15]. Neither party filed objections within the given 10 days.

After reviewing the record, the Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Carter's report and recommendation. The Court thus ACCEPTS and ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Carter's findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations pursuant to § 636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b).

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Court Doc. 11] is DENIED AS MOOT.

A separate judgment will enter.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Davis v. Astrue

United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, at Greeneville
Aug 26, 2009
Case No. 2:08-cv-218 (E.D. Tenn. Aug. 26, 2009)
Case details for

Davis v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH RAY DAVIS, Pro Se, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner…

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

Date published: Aug 26, 2009

Citations

Case No. 2:08-cv-218 (E.D. Tenn. Aug. 26, 2009)

Citing Cases

Disena v. Waste Mgmt. of Mich., Inc.

Dismissal of an action is appropriate where a pro se litigant fails to comply with a readily comprehended…