From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCracken v. Colvin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Sep 6, 2016
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15-CV-1836 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 6, 2016)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15-CV-1836

09-06-2016

DIANA E. MCCRACKEN, Plaintiff v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant


( ) ORDER

AND NOW, this 6th day of September, 2016, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 12) of Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr., recommending the court deny the appeal of Diana E. McCracken ("McCracken") from the decision of the administrative law judge denying her claim for supplemental security income, and it appearing that McCracken did not object 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 some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report," Henderson, 812 F.2d at 878; see also Taylor v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 83 F. Supp. 3d 625, 626 (M.D. Pa. 2015) (citing Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Int'l, Inc., 702 F. Supp. 2d 465, 469 (M.D. Pa. 2010)), 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 an independent review of the record, the court being in agreement with Judge Saporito that the decision of the administrative law judge is "supported by substantial evidence," 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Fargnoli v. Massanari, 247 F.3d 34, 38 (3d Cir. 2001), and concluding that there is no clear error on the face of the record, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. The report (Doc. 12) of Magistrate Judge Saporito is ADOPTED.

2. The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner") denying the application for supplemental security income of Diana E. McCracken ("McCracken") is AFFIRMED.

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

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER

Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge

United States District Court

Middle District of Pennsylvania


Summaries of

McCracken v. Colvin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Sep 6, 2016
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15-CV-1836 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 6, 2016)
Case details for

McCracken v. Colvin

Case Details

Full title:DIANA E. MCCRACKEN, Plaintiff v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of…

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

Date published: Sep 6, 2016

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15-CV-1836 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 6, 2016)