Junaid v. O'Malley
Junaid v. O'Malley
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Ali J., No. 23-cv-910 (KMM/DJF) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Martin J. O’Malley, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
In this case, Plaintiff Ali J seeks judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of his applications for disability benefits and supplemental security income. On May 2, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that Ali J’s request for relief be denied, the Commissioner’s request for relief be granted, and the decision denying the application for benefits be affirmed. R&R, Doc. 17. Ali J’s deadline to file objections to the R&R was May 16, 2024, but Ali J did not object by that deadline, nor has he filed any objections since.
When a party fails to make timely objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the district court reviews the magistrate judge’s decision for clear error.
Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996). Based on the Court’s review of the R&R and the record, the Court finds Judge Foster did not err in concluding that substantial evidence supports the Commissioner’s decision denying Plaintiff’s applications for disability benefits and supplemental security income.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT 1. The Report and Recommendation, Doc. 17, is ACCEPTED; 2. Plaintiff’s Request for Relief, Doc. 13, is DENIED; 3. Defendant’s Request for Relief, Doc. 15, is GRANTED; 4. The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED; and 5. Plaintiff’s Complaint, Doc. 1, is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Let Judgment be entered accordingly.
Date: July 23, 2024 s/Katherine Menendez Katherine Menendez United States District Judge
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Ali J., No. 23-cv-910 (KMM/DJF) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Martin J. O’Malley, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
In this case, Plaintiff Ali J seeks judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of his applications for disability benefits and supplemental security income. On May 2, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that Ali J’s request for relief be denied, the Commissioner’s request for relief be granted, and the decision denying the application for benefits be affirmed. R&R, Doc. 17. Ali J’s deadline to file objections to the R&R was May 16, 2024, but Ali J did not object by that deadline, nor has he filed any objections since.
When a party fails to make timely objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the district court reviews the magistrate judge’s decision for clear error.
Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996). Based on the Court’s review of the R&R and the record, the Court finds Judge Foster did not err in concluding that substantial evidence supports the Commissioner’s decision denying Plaintiff’s applications for disability benefits and supplemental security income.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT 1. The Report and Recommendation, Doc. 17, is ACCEPTED; 2. Plaintiff’s Request for Relief, Doc. 13, is DENIED; 3. Defendant’s Request for Relief, Doc. 15, is GRANTED; 4. The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED; and 5. Plaintiff’s Complaint, Doc. 1, is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Let Judgment be entered accordingly.
Date: July 23, 2024 s/Katherine Menendez Katherine Menendez United States District Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.