Opinion
Civil Action 7:22-cv-00188
09-15-2023
CLAUDIO LOPEZ QUIROGA, Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
MICAELA ALVAREZ, SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Claudio Lopez Quiroga's action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) seeking review of denial of his application for disability benefits, which had been referred to the Magistrate Court for a report and recommendation. On August 2, 2023, the Magistrate Court issued the Report and Recommendation, recommending that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment be granted, that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment be denied, and that this action be dismissed with prejudice. The time for filing objections has passed and no objections have been filed.
Dkt. No. 15.
Dkt. No. 14.
Dkt. No. 13.
Dkt. No. 1-2.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error. Finding no clear error, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED, and that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice.
As noted by the Fifth Circuit, “[t]he advisory committee's note to Rule 72(b) states that, ‘[w]hen no timely objection is filed, the [district] court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.'” Douglas v. United Servs. Auto Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996) (quoting FED. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee's note (1983)) superseded by statute on other grounds by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), as stated in ACS Recovery Sevs., Inc. v. Griffin, No. 11-40446, 2012 WL 1071216, at *7 n.5 (5th Cir. April 2, 2012).
IT IS SO ORDERED.