Lamb v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
ORDER RULING ON 22 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION The court adopts and incorporates the Report and Recommendation by reference in this Order. This action is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. Signed by Honorable Cameron McGowan Currie on 04/06/2017. (egra, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Nancy A. Berryhill,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security
C/A No. 2:16-3844-CMC
OPINION & ORDER
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s pro se complaint, construed as seeking
judicial review of an unidentified decision of the Commissioner of Social Security.
accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 (B)(2)(a), DSC, this matter was
referred to United States Magistrate Judge Mary Gordon Baker for pre-trial proceedings and a
Report and Recommendation (“Report”). On March 17, 2017, the Magistrate Judge issued a
Report recommending that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice and without issuance
and service of process due to Plaintiff’s failure to submit items to render this matter into proper
form and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. ECF No. 22. The Magistrate Judge advised
Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious
consequences if he failed to do so. Plaintiff has filed no objections and the time for doing so has
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation
has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the
court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo
determination of any portion of the Report of the Magistrate Judge to which a specific objection
is made. The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made
by the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28
U.S.C. § 636(b). The court reviews the Report only for clear error in the absence of an
objection. See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005)
(stating that “in the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de
novo review, but instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the
record in order to accept the recommendation.”) (citation omitted).
After reviewing the record of this matter, the applicable law, and the Report and
Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, the court agrees with the conclusions of the
Accordingly, the court adopts and incorporates the Report and
Recommendation by reference in this Order.
This action is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Cameron McGowan Currie
CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE
Senior United States District Judge
Columbia, South Carolina
April 6, 2017
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?