Montgomery v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin.

Full title: SANDRA MONTGOMERY, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA MARTINSBURG

Date published: Mar 22, 2017

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:16-CV-46 (N.D.W. Va. Mar. 22, 2017)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:16-CV-46

03-22-2017

SANDRA MONTGOMERY, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.

GINA M. GROH CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

(GROH)

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On this day, the above-styled matter came before this Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of United States Magistrate Judge Robert W. Trumble [ECF No. 19], entered on March 3, 2017, to which neither party filed objections.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions of the R&R to which objection is made. However, failure to file objections permits the district court to review the R&R under the standard that it believes to be appropriate, and under this circumstance, the parties' right to de novo review is waived. See Webb v. Califano, 468 F. Supp. 825, 830-31 (E.D. Cal. 1979).

Pursuant to Magistrate Judge Trumble's R&R, as well as 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), objections were due within fourteen days after entry of the R&R. Accordingly, because no objections have been filed, this Court will review the R&R for clear error.

In this matter, Magistrate Judge Trumble found that substantial evidence supports the findings of the administrative law judge ("ALJ"). Specifically, Magistrate Judge Trumble found that the ALJ's determination that the Plaintiff was not disabled from February 13, 2013, through the date of the ALJ's November 26, 2014 decision, is supported by substantial evidence and in accordance with social security regulations.

Accordingly, it is the opinion of this Court that Magistrate Judge Trumble's Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 19] should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED. For the reasons more fully stated in the Report and Recommendation, this Court ORDERS that the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 10] is DENIED and the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 13] is GRANTED. The Court further ORDERS that this matter be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and STRICKEN from this Court's active docket.

The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter a separate judgment in favor of the Defendant and transmit copies of this Order to all counsel of record.

DATED: March 22, 2017

/s/_________

GINA M. GROH

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE