Rice v. Social Security Administration

Filing 6

Memorandum of Opinion and Order: This Court, having reviewed the Report and Recommendation and finding no clear error, hereby accepts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. In accordance with that recommendation, plaintiff� 39;s request to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. Plaintiff is ORDERED pay the full filing fee within 14 days of the issuance of this Order. In the event plaintiff fails in this regard, this case will be DISMISSED. Judge Patricia A. Gaughan on 6/27/18. (LC,S) re 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

Sylvester Rice,
Plaintiff,
Vs.
Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 5:18 CV 1220
JUDGE PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN

Memorandum of Opinion and Order

INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate
Judge Thomas M. Parker (Doc. 5) recommending that plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma
pauperis be DENIED. No objections have been filed. The Court ACCEPTS the
recommendation and hereby ORDERS plaintiff to pay the full filing fee within 14 days of the
issuance of this Order. In the event plaintiff fails in this regard, this case will be DISMISSED.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
When objections are made to a Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, the
district court reviews the case de novo. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) provides in
1

pertinent part:
The district judge to whom the case is assigned shall make a de
novo determination upon the record, or after additional evidence,
of any portion of the magistrate judge’s disposition to which
specific written objection has been made in accordance with this
rule. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the
recommended decision, receive further evidence, or recommit the
matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.
As stated in the Advisory Committee Notes, “When no timely objection is filed, the court
need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the
recommendation.” In Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985), the Court held, “It does not
appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate judge’s factual or
legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those
findings.”
DECISION
This Court, having reviewed the Report and Recommendation and finding no clear error,
hereby accepts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. In accordance with that
recommendation, plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. Plaintiff is
ORDERED pay the full filing fee within 14 days of the issuance of this Order. In the event
plaintiff fails in this regard, this case will be DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Patricia A. Gaughan
PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN
United States District Judge
Chief Judge
Dated: 6/27/18

2