Vick v. Astrue

Filing 20

ORDER denying 14 Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and granting 16 Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 2/9/2013. (Sawyer, D.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DMSION
No. 5:11-CV-601-D
LINDA CELESTE VICK,
Plaintiff,

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

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

)

On January 9, 2013, Magistrate Judge Gates issued a Memorandum and Recommendation
("M&R") [D.E. 19]. In the M&R, Judge Gates recommended that the court deny plaintiffs motion
for judgment on the pleadings [D.E. 14], grant defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings
[D.E. 16], 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 findings or recommendations
to which objection is made." Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 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 ofthe 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. Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings [D.E.
14] is DENIED, defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings [D.E. 16] is GRANTED,

defendant's final decision is AFFIRMED, and this action is DISMISSED. The clerk shall close
the case.
SO ORDERED. This _j_ day of February 2013.

2