Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. G-07-555.
March 26, 2009
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before this Court are Plaintiff Joe. L. Rodriguez's ("Rodriguez") Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation [Doc. # 17]. Rodriguez challenges the findings and conclusions in the Memorandum and Recommendation [Doc. # 16] entered by Magistrate Judge Calvin Botley on March 5, 2009, recommending that Defendant Michael J. Astrue's, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration ("Commissioner"), motion for summary judgment [Doc. # 14], be granted.
Rodriguez's Objections are deemed timely filed. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The district court must make a " de novo determination of the objections" raised by the parties. See, e.g., Battle v. United States Parole Comm'n, 834 F.2d 419, 421 (5th Cir. 1987).
The Court has reviewed the Memorandum and Recommendation and Rodriguez's Objections, as well as made a de novo review of the Memorandum and Recommendation and specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McLeod, Alexander, Powel Apffel, P.C. v. Quarles, 925 F.2d 853, 855 (5th Cir. 1991). For the reasons explained in the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation, the Court concludes that Rodriguez's objections should be overruled. It is therefore
"It is reasonable to place upon the parties the duty to pinpoint those portions of the magistrate's report that the district court must specifically consider." Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404, 410 (5th Cir. 1982), overruled on other grounds by Douglass v. United States Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996). "Parties filing objections must specifically identify those findings objected to. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections need not be considered by the district court." Id. at 410 n. 8; accord United States v. Carrillo-Morales, 27 F.3d 1054, 1061 (5th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1178 (1995).
ORDERED that Rodriguez's Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation [Doc. # 17] are OVERRULED. It is further
ORDERED that the Memorandum and Recommendation [Doc. # 16] is ADOPTED as this Court's Memorandum and Order. It is further
ORDERED that Rodriguez's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. # 11] is DENIED. It is further
ORDERED that the Commissioner's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. # 14], is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that the administrative law judge's decision denying Rodriguez disability benefits is AFFIRMED. It is finally
ORDERED that this matter be DISMISSED from the dockets of this Court.