Palestro v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 7

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION adopting 6 Report and Recommendation, denying 3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, and notifying plaintiff he shall have fourteen (14) days from the date of this order to submit the required filing fee. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 03/25/2016. (bshr, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Frank Palestro,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of
Social Security Administration,
Defendant.
____________________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 1:16-707-MGL

ORDER
On March 4, 2016, Plaintiff, through counsel, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
405(g) requesting review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision denying his
application for disability benefits. (ECF No. 1).
The matter now comes before this Court for review of the Report and Recommendation
(“the Report”), (ECF No. 6), filed by Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges to whom this case had
previously been assigned. In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion
to Proceed without Prepayment of Fees or Costs, (ECF No. 3), be denied. Objections to the Report
were due by March 24, 2016. Plaintiff has filed no objections to the Report.
The Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation 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, the
Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v.
Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983).

The Court has carefully reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation.
For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 6), is ACCEPTED and incorporated by reference
into this Order. Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed without Prepayment of Fees or Costs, (ECF No. 3),
is DENIED. Plaintiff shall have fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order to submit the
required filing fee.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

March 25, 2016
Columbia, South Carolina

__s/Mary G. Lewis______
United States District Judge