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, )

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