Middleton v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

Filing 42

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The court adopts the Report (ECF No. 37), and the Commissioner's final decision is AFFIRMED. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 12/7/2015. (gnan )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ORANGEBURG DIVISION
David Scott Middleton,
Plaintiff,
v.
Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner
of Social Security Administration,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 5:14-4181-TMC
ORDER

Plaintiff, David Scott Middleton, proceeding pro se, brought this action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 405(g) and § 1383(c)(3), seeking judicial review of a final decision of the
Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying his claim for Child Insurance
Benefits (“CIB”) and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) under the Social Security Act
(“SSA”). (ECF No. 1). In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02,
D.S.C., this matter was referred to a magistrate judge for pretrial handling. Before the court is the
magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (“Report”), recommending that this court affirm
the Commissioner’s decision to deny CIB and SSI. Neither party has filed objections to the
Report, and the time to do so has now run.
The Report has no presumptive weight and the responsibility to make a final
determination in this matter remains with this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 27071 (1976). In the absence of objections, this court is not required to provide an explanation for
adopting the Report. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Rather, “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.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th
Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note).
Having conducted the required review, the court finds no clear error. Therefore, the court
adopts the Report (ECF No. 37), and the Commissioner’s final decision is AFFIRMED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Timothy M. Cain
United States District Judge
Anderson, South Carolina
December 7, 2015