UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 0:22-cv-62099-GAYLES/STRAUSS

DWIGHT PRUDE,

Plaintiff,

v.

KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration,

Defendant. ________________________________/

ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Jared M. Strauss’s Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) [ECF No. 19]. On November 14, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Complaint seeking judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”) denying Plaintiff’s entitlement to disability benefits. [ECF No. 1]. The matter was referred to Judge Strauss pursuant to

(b)(1)(B) for a ruling on all pretrial, non- dispositive motions and for a Report and Recommendation on any dispositive motions. [ECF No. 2]. On September 15, 2023, Judge Strauss issued his Report recommending that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 15] be denied, the Commissioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 17] be granted, and that the Commissioner’s decision be affirmed. Plaintiff has timely objected to the Report. [ECF No. 20]. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.

(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz,

(11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection is made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C.,

(M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc.,

(11th Cir. 2006). The Court has conducted a de novo review of the record and agrees with Judge Strauss’s well-reasoned analysis and recommendation that the Commissioner’s decision should be affirmed. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: (1) Judge Strauss’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 19] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference. (2) Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 15] is DENIED. (3) The Commissioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 17] is GRANTED. (4) The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED. (5) This action is CLOSED for administrative purposes. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 27th day of October, 2023.

af BLK UNITED STATES DI ICT JUDGE