UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 21-21603-SINGHAL/McAliley

TAWANDA ROBINSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant. __________________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support Thereof (“Plaintiff’s Motion”) (DE [21]) and Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment with Supporting Memorandum of Law and Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (“Defendant’s Motion”) (DE [24]). In this case, Plaintiff Tawanda Robinson (“Plaintiff”) seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, which denied Plaintiff’s application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental social security income under the Social Security Act,

, et seq. See (Compl. (DE [1-1]), April 26, 2021). This case was referred to the Honorable Chris McAliley, United States Magistrate Judge (“Judge McAliley”), 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. Judge McAliley issued a Report and Recommendation (DE [28]) on December 21, 2022. In the Report and Recommendation (DE [28]), Judge McAliley recommends Plaintiff’s Motion (DE [21]) be denied, Defendant’s Motion (DE [24]) be granted, and the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) decision be affirmed.

Parties have fourteen days to file any objections to a magistrate judge’s factual findings. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2); S.D. Fla. Mag. R. 4(b). Here, no objections were filed. With no objections filed, the Court’s review of the Report and Recommendation (DE [191]) is properly limited to a de novo review of only its legal conclusions. See Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London v. PharmaTech, LLC,

, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 19, 2019) (“Legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, even in the absence of an objection.”). This Court has reviewed the entire file and record and has made a de novo review of the issues. No objections to the Report and Recommendation (DE [28]) have been filed, thus, the Court reviews it for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. Accordingly,

it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (DE [28]) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. 2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support Thereof (DE [21]) is DENIED. 3. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment with Supporting Memorandum of Law and Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (DE [24]) is GRANTED. 4. Furthermore, the Administrative Law Judge’s Decision is AFFIRMED. 5. To the extent not otherwise disposed of, any scheduled hearings are CANCELED, all pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT, and all deadlines are TERMINATED. 6. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 6th day of January 2023. \ <= UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies furnished to counsel of record via CM/ECF