UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 19-cv-25251-BLOOM/Louis

RAUL MASTRAPA MELENDEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,

Defendant. ________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff Raul Mastrapa Melendez’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. [17] (“Plaintiff’s Motion”), and Defendant Andrew Saul’s1 (“Defendant”) Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. [21] (“Defendant’s Motion”). This case involves a redetermination of Plaintiff’s application for social security income under the Social Security Act,

, et seq. See ECF No. [1]. This case was referred to the Honorable Lauren F. Louis, United States Magistrate Judge, for a ruling on all pre-trial, non-dispositive matters, and a report and recommendation on any dispositive matters, pursuant to

and Local Magistrate Judge Rule 1. ECF No. [14]. On January 11, 2021, Judge Louis issued her Report and Recommendations recommending that Plaintiff’s Motion be denied, and she recommended that Defendant’s Motion be granted. ECF No. [22] (“Report”). The Report further advised the parties that any objections to the Report were due within fourteen days of being served with a copy.

; see also

(b)(1)(C)

1 As Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. Case No. 19-cv-25251-BLOOM/Louis

(‘Within fourteen days after being served with a copy [of a report and recommendations], any party may serve and file written objections . . . as provided by rules of court.”). To date, neither party has filed objections to the Report, nor have they sought additional time within which to do so. The Court has nevertheless conducted a de novo review of the Report, the record in this case and the applicable law, and is otherwise fully advised. See Williams v. McNeil,

(11th Cir. 2009) (citing

(b)(1)). Upon careful review, the Court finds Magistrate Judge Louis’s Report to be well-reasoned and correct. The Court agrees with the analysis in the Report and concludes that Plaintiff's Motion should be denied, and Defendant’s Motion should be granted for the reasons set forth therein. Accordingly, itis ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. Judge Louis’s Report, ECF No. [22], is ADOPTED. 2. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. [17], is DENIED. 3. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. [21], is GRANTED. 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on January 26, 2021.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies to: The Honorable Lauren F. Louis Counsel of Record