Bowling v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Full title: KRISTINE BOWLING, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY Defendant.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Date published: Aug 11, 2014

CASE NO. 1:13 CV 1361 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 11, 2014)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:13 CV 1361

08-11-2014

KRISTINE BOWLING, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY Defendant.

JUDGE DONALD C. NUGENT

MAGISTRATE JUDGE JAMES R.
KNEPP, II

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge James R. Knepp, II (ECF #16). On June 20, 2013, Plaintiff, Kristine Bowling, filed her complaint challenging the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying her claim for Supplemental Security Income (SSI).

On June 12, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued his Report and Recommendation. Magistrate Judge Knepp found the Commissioner's decision denying SSI to be supported by substantial evidence and recommended that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed. Objections to the Report and Recommendation were to be filed within 14 days of service. No objections were filed.

Standard of Review

The applicable standard of review for a magistrate judge's report and recommendation depends upon whether objections were made to the report. In this case, neither party has filed any objection to the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation. "When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." FED. R. CIV. P. 72, advisory committee's notes (citation omitted). In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court stated in Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (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." Nonetheless, this Court has thoroughly reviewed the Report and Recommendation's factual and legal conclusions and finds them to be thorough, well-supported, and correct.

Conclusion

This Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Knepp's Report and Recommendation. Following a thorough evaluation of the record, this Court adopts Magistrate Judge Knepp's findings of fact and conclusions of law as its own.

Magistrate Judge Knepp thoroughly and exhaustively reviewed the case, and properly found the ALJ's decision to be supported by substantial evidence. The Report and Recommendation (ECF #16) is hereby ADOPTED. The Commissioner's decision denying Plaintiff's application for Supplemental Security Income is AFFIRMED. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Donald C. Nugent

DONALD C. NUGENT

United States District Judge

DATED: August 11, 2014