Edison C. v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON EDISON C., Plaintiff, Case No. 3:25-cv-76 vs. COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL District Judge Michael J. Newman SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Magistrate Judge Caroline H. Gentry Defendant. ______________________________________________________________________________ ORDER: (1) ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. No. 10); (2) DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT (Doc. No. 5); AND (3) TERMINATING THIS CASE ON THE DOCKET ______________________________________________________________________________ This Social Security appeal is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Caroline H. Gentry (Doc. No. 10), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Judge Gentry recommends that Plaintiff’s pro se complaint be dismissed with prejudice for want of prosecution. Noting that no objections have been filed and that the time for filing objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has expired, and having carefully considered this matter,1 the Court concludes that the R&R sets forth the applicable law and is well reasoned. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: (1) the R&R is ADOPTED; (2) Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. No. 5) is DISMISSED with prejudice for want of prosecution; and (3) this case is TERMINATED on the docket.

1 The Court has liberally construed in Plaintiff’s favor his pro se complaint and the documents attached thereto. Doc. No. 5; see Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976).

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the Court CERTIFIES that an appeal of this Order would not be taken in good faith and, therefore, the Court DENIES Plaintiff leave to appeal in forma pauperis.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

February 25, 2026 s/Michael J. Newman Hon. Michael J. Newman United States District Judge