Burns v. Saul, No. 2:2020cv00390 - Document 22 (S.D.W. Va. 2021)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The 21 Proposed Findings and Recommendation is ADOPTED and incorporated herein; the Plaintiff's 17 request to reverse the Commissioner's decision is DENIED and the Defendant's 20 request to affirm th e Commissioner's decision is GRANTED; the final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED; this action is DISMISSED from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 4/21/2021. (cc: Magistrate Judge Tinsley; counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (kew)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Burns v. Saul Doc. 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION RHONDA SUZZETTE BURNS, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20-cv-00390 ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER By Standing Order (Document 3) entered on June 10, 2020, this action was referred to the Honorable Dwane L. Tinsley, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission to this Court of proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). On April 5, 2021, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 21) wherein it is recommended that this Court deny the Plaintiff’s request to reverse the Commissioner’s decision, grant the Defendant’s request to affirm the Commissioner’s decision, affirm the final decision of the Commissioner, and dismiss this action from the Court’s docket. Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by April 19, 2021. Neither party has timely filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Proposed Findings and Recommendation. The Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the 1 Dockets.Justia.com factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the findings or recommendation to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 14950 (1985); see also Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983) (holding that districts courts may adopt proposed findings and recommendations without explanation in the absence of objections). Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the Proposed Findings and Recommendation, and ORDERS that the Plaintiff’s request to reverse the Commissioner’s decision (Document 17) be DENIED and the Defendant’s request to affirm the Commissioner’s decision (Document 20) be GRANTED. The Court further ORDERS that the final decision of the Commissioner be AFFIRMED and that this action be DISMISSED from the Court’s docket. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to Magistrate Judge Tinsley, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party. ENTER: 2 April 21, 2021
]]>
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.
