Kraus v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 45

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION agreeing with 43 Report and Recommendation, affirming the Commissioner's final decision. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 1/2/14. (alew, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
GREENVILLE DIVISION
Thomas Paul Kraus,
Plaintiff,
v.
Carolyn W. Colvin, Commissioner
of Social Security,1
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 6:12-2935-TMC
ORDER

The plaintiff, Thomas Paul Kraus, brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g),
seeking judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security
(“Commissioner”) denying his claim for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) 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 DIB. The parties were advised of their
right to file objections to the Report. (ECF No. 43 at 16). However, neither party has filed
objections 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
1

Carolyn W. Colvin became the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration on
February 14, 2012. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d), Colvin should be substituted for Michael J.
Astrue.

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).
The court has thoroughly reviewed the record and agrees with the Report. Accordingly,
the Commissioner’s final decision is AFFIRMED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Timothy M. Cain
United States District Judge
Anderson, South Carolina
January 2, 2014