Medley v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 24

ORDER adopting 22 the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Clifford J. Proud recommending that this Court affirm the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security to deny Plaintiff's application for Supplemental Security Income. Signed by Judge G. Patrick Murphy on 4/29/2013. (mab)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner of )
Social Security
)
)
Defendant.
AARON MEDLEY

CIVIL NO. 12-304-GPM

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
MURPHY, District Judge:
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge Clifford J. Proud (Doc. 22), recommending that this Court affirm the final
decision of the Commissioner of Social Security to deny Plaintiff’s application for Supplemental
Security Income (“SSI”). The Report and Recommendation was entered on February 7, 2013.
No timely objections have been filed.1
Where timely objections are filed, this Court must undertake a de novo review of the
Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), (C); FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); SDIL-LR
73.1(b); Harper v. City of Chicago Heights, 824 F. Supp. 786, 788 (N.D. Ill. 1993); see also Govas
v. Chalmers, 965 F.2d 298, 301 (7th Cir. 1992). The Court “may accept, reject or modify the
magistrate judge’s recommended decision.” Harper, 824 F. Supp. at 788. In making this
determination, the Court must look at all of the evidence contained in the record and “give ‘fresh
consideration to those issues to which specific objections have been made.’” Id., (quoting 12
1

The Court notes here that Plaintiff is represented by counsel.
Page 1 of 2

Charles Alan Wright et al., Federal Practice and Procedure § 3076.8, at p. 55 (1st ed. 1973) (1992
Pocket Part)).
However, where neither timely nor specific objections to the Report and Recommendation
are made, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), this Court need not conduct a de novo review of the
Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Therefore, the Court
ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Proud’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 22)2 and AFFIRMS the
final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security to deny Plaintiff’s application for SSI. The
Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: April 29, 2013
/s/ ZA ctàÜ|v~ `âÜÑ{ç
G. PATRICK MURPHY
United States District Judge

2

While a de novo review is not required, the Court fully agrees with the findings, analysis, and
conclusions of Magistrate Judge Proud.
Page 2 of 2