Kidd v. Saul, No. 1:2019cv00603 - Document 19 (S.D.W. Va. 2020)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The court ADOPTS the 18 Proposed Findings and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn; DENIES plaintiff's 13 request for judgment on the pleadings; GRANTS defendant's 17 request to affirm the decision of the Commissioner; AFFIRMS the final decision of the Commissioner; DISMISSES this action and directs the Clerk to remove this case from the court's active docket. Signed by Senior Judge David A. Faber on 6/22/2020. (cc: counsel of record and any unrepresented parties) (arb)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Kidd v. Saul Doc. 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT BLUEFIELD TIMOTHY KIDD, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-00603 ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER By Standing Order, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn for submission of findings and recommendation regarding disposition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn submitted to the court his Findings and Recommendation on April 6, 2020, in which he recommended that the court deny plaintiff’s request for judgment on the pleadings, (ECF No. 13), grant defendant’s request to affirm the decision of the Commissioner, (ECF No. 17), affirm the final decision of the Commissioner, dismiss this action, and remove this matter from the court’s docket. (ECF No. 18.) In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the parties were allotted fourteen days and three mailing days in which to file any objections to Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn’s Findings and Recommendation. The failure of any party to file Dockets.Justia.com such objections within the time allowed constitutes a waiver of such party’s right to a de novo review by this court. Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363 (4th Cir. 1989). Objections to the Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by April 23, 2020. Neither party filed any objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation. Accordingly, the court adopts the Finding and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn as follows: 1. Plaintiff’s request for judgment on the pleadings, (ECF No. 13), is DENIED; 2. Defendant’s request to affirm the decision of the Commissioner, (ECF No. 17), is GRANTED; 3. The final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED; 4. This action is DISMISSED; and 5. The Clerk is directed to remove this case from the court’s active docket. The Clerk is further directed to forward a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to counsel of record and unrepresented parties. IT IS SO ORDERED this 22nd day of June, 2020. ENTER: David A. Faber Senior United States District Judge 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.
