Tallmage v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 21

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION adopting 18 Report and Recommendation, affirming the decision of the Commissioner. Signed by Chief Judge Terry L. Wooten on 03/23/2015. (bshr, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA AIKEN DIVISION Susan Tallmage, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Commissioner of Social Security ) Administration, ) ) Defendant. ) ___________________________________ ) C/A No.: 1:13-cv-02035-TLW ORDER The plaintiff, Susan Tallmage (“Plaintiff”), brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to obtain judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Defendant”), denying Plaintiff’s claims for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. Doc. #1. This matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (“the Report”) filed by United States Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges, Doc. #18, to whom this case was previously assigned pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2), DSC. In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the Commissioner’s decision be affirmed. Objections were due by September 8, 2014. Neither party filed objections. This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that Report. 28 U.S.C. § 636. In the absence of objections to the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, this Court is not 1 required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). This Court has carefully reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. Based on this review, and after careful consideration of the record, the Court finds that the decision of the Administrative Law Judge to deny benefits was supported by substantial evidence. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, it is hereby ORDERED that the Report, Doc. #18, is ACCEPTED. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, the Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Terry L. Wooten Chief United States District Judge March 23, 2015 Columbia, South Carolina 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?