Opinion
Civil Action 1:23-cv-6405-SAL
06-28-2024
Naomi L.,[1]Plaintiff, v. Martin O'Malley, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant.
ORDER
SHERRI A. LYDON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Plaintiff brought this action pursuant to Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to obtain judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying her claim for disability insurance benefits (“DIB”) and supplemental security income (“SSI”) pursuant the Social Security Act. [ECF No. 1.] In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(a) (D.S.C.), this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges for pretrial matters.
On April 30, 2024, the magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation (“Report”), recommending that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed. [ECF No. 14.] Objections to the Report were due on May 14, 2024. No objections were filed.
The magistrate judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of only those portions of the Report that have been specifically objected to, and the court may accept, reject, or modify the Report, in whole or in part. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In the absence of objections, the court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the Report and 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) (citing Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory committee's note).
After a thorough review of the Report, the applicable law, and the record of this case in accordance with the above standard, the court finds no clear error, adopts the Report, and incorporates the Report by reference herein. Accordingly, the decision denying Plaintiff's DIB and SSI is AFFIRMED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.