From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Houston v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ANDERSON/GREENWOOD DIVISION
May 20, 2019
Civil Action No. 8:18-01144-MGL (D.S.C. May. 20, 2019)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 8:18-01144-MGL

05-20-2019

ROBERT KERMIT HOUSTON, Plaintiff, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant.


ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF DEFENDANT

This is a Social Security appeal in which Plaintiff Robert Kermit Houston (Houston) seeks judicial review of the final decision of Defendant Nancy A. Berryhill (Berryhill) denying his claim for Disability Insurance Benefits. The parties are represented by excellent counsel. The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting to the Court Berryhill's decision be affirmed. The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Civil Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina.

The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight. The responsibility to make a final determination remains with the Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report to which specific objection is made, and the Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on April 15, 2019. On April 29, 2019, Houston filed his Notice of Not Filing Objections to the Report. "[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must 'only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.'" Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).

After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of the Court Berryhill's decision is AFFIRMED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Signed this 20th day of May 2019, in Columbia, South Carolina.

/s/Mary Geiger Lewis

MARY GEIGER LEWIS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Houston v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ANDERSON/GREENWOOD DIVISION
May 20, 2019
Civil Action No. 8:18-01144-MGL (D.S.C. May. 20, 2019)
Case details for

Houston v. Berryhill

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT KERMIT HOUSTON, Plaintiff, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ANDERSON/GREENWOOD DIVISION

Date published: May 20, 2019

Citations

Civil Action No. 8:18-01144-MGL (D.S.C. May. 20, 2019)