Boyd v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 34

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION adopting 29 Report and Recommendation, affirming the decision of the Commissioner. Signed by Chief Judge Terry L. Wooten on 08/18/2014. (bshr, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ROCK HILL DIVISION
Johnny Boyd, Jr.,

Case No. 0:13-cv-00638-TLW

PLAINTIFF
v.
Order
Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of
Social Security,
DEFENDANT

This social security matter now comes before the Court for review of the Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) filed on July 18, 2014 by Magistrate Judge Gossett, to whom this
case was assigned. (Doc. #29.) In the R&R, the Magistrate Judge recommends affirming the
Commissioner’s decision denying Plaintiff’s claims for Disability Insurance Benefits and
Supplemental Security Income. Plaintiff filed objections to the R&R, (Doc. #30), and the
Commissioner filed a response to the objections, (Doc. #31). This matter is now ripe for
decision.
In reviewing the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation, the Court applies the following
standard:
The magistrate judge makes only a recommendation to the Court, to which any
party may file written objections . . . . The Court is not bound by the
recommendation of the magistrate judge but, instead, retains responsibility for the
final determination. The Court is required to make a de novo determination of
those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which
an objection is made. However, the Court is not required to review, under a de
novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate
judge as to those portions of the report and recommendation to which no
objections are addressed. While the level of scrutiny entailed by the Court's
review of the Report thus depends on whether or not objections have been filed,
in either case the Court is free, after review, to accept, reject, or modify any of the
magistrate judge's findings or recommendations.
1

Wallace v. Hous. Auth. of City of Columbia, 791 F. Supp. 137, 138 (D.S.C. 1992) (citations
omitted).
In light of the standard set forth in Wallace, the Court has reviewed, de novo, the R&R
and the objections.

After careful review of the R&R and the objections, the R&R is

ACCEPTED. Plaintiff’s objections are OVERRULED, and the Commissioner’s decision is
AFFIRMED for the reasons stated by the Magistrate Judge.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Terry L. Wooten
Terry L. Wooten
Chief United States District Judge
August 18, 2014
Columbia, South Carolina

2