United States District Court, N.D. New York
July 13, 2015
REBECCA JANE KIMBALL, Plaintiff,
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.
LAWRENCE E. KAHN, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on June 16, 2015, by the Honorable Andrew T. Baxter, U.S. Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3. Dkt. No. 15 ("Report-Recommendation"). Plaintiff Rebecca Kimball ("Plaintiff") timely filed objections. Dkt. Nos. 16 ("Objections); 16-1 ("Memorandum").
Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy of a magistrate judge's reportrecommendation, the party "may serve and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations." FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); L.R. 72.1(c). If a party objects to a reportrecommendation, "the Court subjects that portion of the report-recommendation to a de novo review." Williams v. Roberts, No. 11-CV-0029, 2012 WL 760777, at *3 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 7, 2012) (citing FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)); see also United States v. Male Juvenile, 121 F.3d 34, 38 (2d Cir. 1997). If no objections are made, or if an objection is general, conclusory, perfunctory, or a mere reiteration of an argument made to the magistrate judge, a district court should review that aspect of a report-recommendation for clear error. Barnes v. Prack, No. 11-CV-0857, 2013 WL 1121353, at *1 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2013); Farid v. Bouey, 554 F.Supp.2d 301, 306-07 & n.2 (N.D.N.Y. 2008); see also Machicote v. Ercole, No. 06 Civ. 13320, 2011 WL 3809920, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 25, 2011) ("[E]ven a pro se party's objections to a Report and Recommendation must be specific and clearly aimed at particular findings in the magistrate's proposal, such that no party be allowed a second bite at the apple by simply relitigating a prior argument."). "A [district] judge... may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).
Plaintiff objects to the Report-Recommendation's finding that the Administrative Law Judge's decision is supported by substantial evidence. Mem. at 2-3. However, Plaintiff's Objection is a mere reiteration of the arguments made in Plaintiff's appeal before Judge Baxter. Compare id., with Dkt. No. 12 ("Brief"). Accordingly, the Court has reviewed the entirety of the Report-Recommendation for clear error and has found none.
Accordingly, it is hereby:
ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 15) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED, that Plaintiff's Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Court serve a copy of this Order on all parties in accordance with the Local Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.