Moore v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION

COLLEEN MOORE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) NO. 3:21-cv-00035 v. ) JUDGE RICHARDSON ) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL ) SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. No. 32), recommending that Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees (Doc. No. 28, “Motion”) be granted and the Defendant be ordered to pay Plaintiff $1,799.55, less any offset amounts owed to the United States. The failure to object to a report and recommendation releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. Frias v. Frias, No. 2:18-cv-00076, 2019 WL 549506, at *2 (M.D. Tenn. Feb. 12, 2019); Hart v. Bee Property Mgmt., No. 18-cv-11851, 2019 WL 1242372, at * 1 (E.D. Mich. March 18, 2019) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)). The district court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, those aspects of the report and recommendation to which no objection is made. Ashraf v. Adventist Health System/Sunbelt, Inc., 322 F. Supp. 3d 879, 881 (W.D. Tenn. 2018); Benson v. Walden Security, No. 3:18-cv-0010, 2018 WL 6322332, at *3 (M.D. Tenn. Dec. 4, 2018). The district court should adopt the magistrate judge’s findings and rulings to which no specific objection is filed. Id. No objections have been filed. Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and the file. The Report and Recommendation is adopted and approved. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion (Doc. No. 28) is GRANTED, and Defendant is ordered to pay the amount of $1,799.55, less any offset amounts owed to the United States, by remitting payment to the business address of Plaintiff's counsel. IT IS SO ORDERED.

CLL Richardson ELI RICHARDSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE