Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 17

ORDER adopting 15 Report and Recommendations. The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying benefits in this case is affirmed. Signed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 7/11/2011.(aste)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Misty L. Brown,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
vs.
)
)
Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social
)
Security,
)
)
Defendant.
)
_______________________________________)

C/A No.: 3:10-692-JFA-JRM

ORDER

The plaintiff, Misty L. Brown, brings this action pursuant to § 405(g) of the Social
Security Act, as amended, to obtain judicial review of the final decision by the Commissioner
of Social Security denying plaintiff’s claim for disability insurance benefits (DIB) and
Supplemental Security Income (SSI).
The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action 1 has prepared a Report and
Recommendation wherein he suggests that the Commissioner’s decision to deny benefits
should be affirmed. The Magistrate Judge provides a detailed discussion of the undisputed
and relevant medical evidence and the standards of law which this court incorporates without
a recitation.
The parties were advised of their right to submit objections to the Report and
1

The Magistrate Judge’s review is made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local
Civil Rule 73.02. 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.
Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those
portions of the Report to which specific objection is made and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, or recommit the matter to the Magistrate
Judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

1

Recommendation which was filed on May 27, 2011. Neither party has filed objections to the
Report. In the absence of specific objections to the Report of the Magistrate Judge, this 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 record and finds the recommendation of the
Magistrate Judge to be proper. It is therefore ordered that the Report is incorporated herein
and that the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying benefits in this case is
affirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

July 11, 2011
Columbia, South Carolina

Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge

2