Jackson v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 3:2014cv00350 - Document 14 (N.D.N.Y 2015)
Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER accepting and adopting # 13 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter in its entirety. Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied; defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted. The Commissioner's decision is affirmed, and the plaintiff's complaint is dismissed. Signed by Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 5/15/15. (lmw)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Jackson v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ________________________________________ LAURIE ANN JACKSON, Plaintiff, 3:14-CV-0350 (GTS/ATB) v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. ________________________________________ APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: CLARK JORDAN PEZZINO Counsel for Plaintiff 1207 Delaware Ave., Suite 202 Buffalo, New York 14209 AMANDA R. JORDAN, ESQ. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF REG’L GEN. COUNSEL–REGION II Counsel for Defendant 26 Federal Plaza, Room 3904 New York, New York 10278 MONIKA K. CRAWFORD, ESQ. GLENN T. SUDDABY, United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER The above matter comes to this Court following a Report-Recommendation by United States Magistrate Andrew T. Baxter, filed on April 7, 2015, recommending that the Commissioner’s decision be affirmed and Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed. (Dkt. No. 13.) Objections to the Report-Recommendation have not been filed and the time in which to do so has expired. (See generally Docket Sheet.) After carefully reviewing all of the papers herein, including Magistrate Judge Baxter’s thorough Report-Recommendation, the Court can find no Dockets.Justia.com clear error in the Report-Recommendation.1 As a result, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in its entirety; and Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed in its entirety. ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Baxter’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 13) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 11) is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED that Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 12) is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED that the Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED. Dated: May 15, 2015 Syracuse, New York 1 When no objection is made to a report-recommendation, the Court subjects that report-recommendation to only a clear error review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes: 1983 Addition. When performing such a “clear error” review, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Id.; see also Batista v. Walker, 94-CV-2826, 1995 WL 453299, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. July 31, 1995) (Sotomayor, J.) (“I am permitted to adopt those sections of [a magistrate judge's] report to which no specific objection is made, so long as those sections are not facially erroneous.”) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
