Roberson v. Astrue

Filing 32

ORDER denying 23 Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and granting 26 Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 1/14/2013. (Sawyer, D.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
EASTERN DIVISION
No. 4: 12-CV-55-D

GREGORY T. ROBERSON,
Plaintiff,

v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

On December 19, 2012, Magistrate Judge Webb issued a Memorandum and
Recommendation ("M&R") in this matter [D.E. 31]. In the M&R, Judge Webb recommended that
the court deny plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings [D.E. 23], grant defendant's motion
for judgment on the pleadings [D.E. 26], and affirm defendant's final decision. Neither party filed
objections to the M&R.
"The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to make a de novo determination of
those portions ofthe [magistrate judge's] report or specified proposed fmdings or recommendations
towhichobjectionismade." Diamond v. Colonial Life &Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d310, 315 (4th
Cir. 2005) (alteration in original) (emphasis and quotation omitted). Absent a timely 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." Id. (quotation omitted).
The court has reviewed the M&R, the record, and the briefs. The court is satisfied that there
is no clear error on the face of the record. Plaintiffs motion for judgment on the pleadings [D.E.
23] is DENIED, defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings [D.E. 26] is GRANTED,

defendant's final decision is AFFIRMED, and this action is DISMISSED. The clerk shall close
the case.
SO ORDERED. This

I+ day of January 2013.
SC.DEVERill
J
Chief United States District Judge

2