Rhea v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of
Rhea v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT GREENEVILLE
LORI Y. RHEA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No. 2:21-cv-48 v. ) ) Judge Atchley ) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL ) Magistrate Judge McCook SECURITY, ) ) Defendant. )
ORDER On February 7, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Jill E. McCook filed a Report and Recommendation [Doc. 39] pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 636, the Rules of this Court, and the Referral Order [Doc. 32]. The Magistrate Judge recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees [Doc. 30] be granted. No one has filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation.1 The Court has nonetheless reviewed the Report and Recommendation, as well as the record, and agrees with Magistrate Judge McCook’s well-reasoned conclusions. Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS Magistrate Judge McCook’s findings of fact and conclusions of law as set forth in the Report and Recommendation [Doc. 39]. Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees [Doc. 30] is GRANTED.
1 Magistrate Judge McCook advised that the parties had 14 days in which to object to the Report and Recommendation and that failure to do so would waive any right to appeal. [Doc. 39 at 7 n.1]; see Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2); see also Thomas v. Arn,
474 U.S. 140, 148-51(1985) (“It does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate judge’s factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings.”). SO ORDERED. /s/ Charles E. Atchley, Jr. CHARLES E. ATCHLEY, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Reference
- Status
- Unknown