Mills v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 27

ORDER RULING ON 25 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION It is ordered that the Commissioner's final decision denying benefits is hereby affirmed. Signed by Honorable Patrick Michael Duffy on 08/08/2017. (egra, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA Angela D. Mills, Plaintiff, vs. Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ) C.A. #6:16-1320-PMD ) ) ) ) ORDER ) ) ) ) ) ) This social security case is before the Court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (the "Commissioner") to deny the plaintiff's request for benefits be affirmed. The record includes a report and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge made in accordance with this Court's Order of Reference and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate judge's report 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(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge's report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984). No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge's report. A review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the magistrate judge's report is incorporated into this Order. For the reasons articulated by the magistrate judge, the Commissioner's final decision denying benefits is hereby AFFIRMED. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. August 8, 2017 Charleston, South Carolina 2

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?