IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION

LAVERNE WILLIAMS, § §

§ Plaintiff, §

§ v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:23-CV-68-RWS-JBB

§ COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY § ADMINISTRATION, § § Defendant.

ORDER Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, which recommends the above-entitled Social Security action be affirmed. Docket No. 13. Plaintiff Laverne Williams initiated this action pursuant to

(g), seeking judicial review of the denial of her application for social security benefits. Docket No. 1. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge J. Boone Baxter in accordance with

. Because no objections have been received, Plaintiff is barred from de novo review by the District Judge of the Magistrate Judge’s proposed findings, conclusions and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District Court. See Duarte v. City of Lewisville, Texas,

(5th Cir. 2017); Arriaga v. Laxminarayan, Case No. 4:21-CV-00203- RAS,

, at *1 (E.D. Tex. July 31, 2021). The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this case and the Report of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined the Report of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson,

(5th Cir.), cert. denied,

(1989) (where no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.”). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 13) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further ORDERED that the above-entitled and numbered Social Security action is AFFIRMED.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 31st day of May, 2024.

foeher LU plrweche G2. ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2