Pratt
v.
Astrue

This case is not covered by Casetext's citator
United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, at GreenevilleAug 14, 2009
Case No. 2:08-cv-165. (E.D. Tenn. Aug. 14, 2009)

Cases citing this case

How cited

  • Taylor v. Astrue

    …-------- Furthermore, even if the ALJ erred by failing to find any exertional limitations stemming from…

lock 1 Citing casekeyboard_arrow_right

Case No. 2:08-cv-165.

August 14, 2009


ORDER


United States Magistrate Judge Susan K. Lee filed her Report and Recommendation [Court Doc. 20] pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Plaintiff has filed timely objections [Court Doc. 21].

The Court has reviewed de novo those portion of Magistrate Judge Lee's Report and Recommendation to which an objection has been made. Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 72(b). The Court finds that Plaintiff's objections raise no new arguments but are simply a reargument of issues previously raised on summary judgment and which were fully addressed in the Report and Recommendation. The Court finds that further analysis of these same arguments would be merely cumulative and is unwarranted in light of Magistrate Judge Lee's well-reasoned and well-supported Report and Recommendation.

Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Lee's findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations pursuant to § 636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b). Plaintiff's objections [Court Doc. 21] are OVERRULED. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [Court Doc. 7] is DENIED. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Court Doc. 18] is GRANTED. The Commissioner's denial of benefits is AFFIRMED and the instant action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk shall close the case.

SO ORDERED.