Opinion
EP-22-CV-369-KC-LS
03-12-2024
RICARDO ORTEGA, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
KATHLEEN CARDONE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
On this day, the Court considered the above-captioned case. Pursuant to Paragraph 2(c) of the Court's May 1, 2012, Standing Order, this case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Leon Schydlower. Oct. 18, 2022, Text Order. On February 26, 2024, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), ECF No. 16, which recommended that the Court affirm the decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”) denying Plaintiff's application for supplemental security income. Id. at 9.
Parties have fourteen days from service of a Report and Recommendation of a United States Magistrate Judge to file written objections. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Over fourteen days have elapsed since all parties were served with the R&R, and no objections have been filed.
Federal district courts conduct de novo review of those portions of a report and recommendation to which a party has objected. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (“A judge . . . shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection is made ....”).
When parties do not file written objections, courts apply a “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law” standard of review to a report and recommendation. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989). After reviewing the R&R, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge's proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law and finds that they are neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. See id.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the R&R, ECF No. 16, in its entirety, and ORDERS that the Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED.
SO ORDERED.