Becton v. O'Malley

E.D. North Carolina

Becton v. O'Malley

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina

DecidedMarch 16, 2023

Docket5:21-cv-00449

StatusUnknown

This text of Becton v. O'Malley (Becton v. O'Malley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Becton v. O'Malley, (E.D.N.C. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION No. 5:21-CV-449-D

MARIE A. BECTON, )

Plaintiff, v. ORDER KILOLO KIJAKAZI], ~ Acting Commissioner of Social Security, ) Defendant. .

On January 18, 2023, Magistrate Judge Numbers issued a Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”) and recommended that this court grant defendant’s motion to dismiss [D.E. 25]. See [D.E. 40]. On January 25, 2023, plaintiff supplemented her pleadings [D.E. 41]. Neither party objected to the M&R. “The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to make a de novo determination of those portions of the magistrate judge’s report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 3 10, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (cleaned up); see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Absent a timely objection, “a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Diamond, 416 F.3d at 315 (quotation omitted). The court has reviewed the M&R, the record, and the briefs. The court is satisfied that there is no clear error on the face of the record. Accordingly, the court adopts the conclusions in the M&R [D.E. 40].

In sum, the court GRANTS defendant’s motion to dismiss [D.E. 25] and DISMISSES this action. The clerk shall close the case. SO ORDERED. This day of March, 2023.

A 2v ts C. DEVER I United States District Judge

2 .

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION No. 5:21-CV-449-D

MARIE A. BECTON, )

Plaintiff, v. ORDER KILOLO KIJAKAZI], ~ Acting Commissioner of Social Security, ) Defendant. .

On January 18, 2023, Magistrate Judge Numbers issued a Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”) and recommended that this court grant defendant’s motion to dismiss [D.E. 25]. See [D.E. 40]. On January 25, 2023, plaintiff supplemented her pleadings [D.E. 41]. Neither party objected to the M&R. “The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to make a de novo determination of those portions of the magistrate judge’s report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 3 10, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (cleaned up); see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Absent a timely objection, “a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Diamond, 416 F.3d at 315 (quotation omitted). The court has reviewed the M&R, the record, and the briefs. The court is satisfied that there is no clear error on the face of the record. Accordingly, the court adopts the conclusions in the M&R [D.E. 40].

In sum, the court GRANTS defendant’s motion to dismiss [D.E. 25] and DISMISSES this action. The clerk shall close the case. SO ORDERED. This day of March, 2023.

A 2v ts C. DEVER I United States District Judge

2 .

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Becton v. O'Malley, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/becton-v-omalley-nced-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack