Matthews v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

Filing 17

ORDER RULING ON 14 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The court adopts the Report and Recommendation and affirms the decision of the Commissioner. Signed by Honorable Richard M Gergel on 10/25/2013. (egra, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Wade Barkley Matthews,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security
Administration,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 9: 12-2437-RMG

ORDER

Plaintiff has brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) seeking judicial review of
the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying his claim for Disability
Insurance Benefits. In accord with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 DSC, this
matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge for pre-trial handling. The Magistrate
Judge issued a Report and Recommendation on October 2,2013 recommending that the decision
ofthe Commissioner be affirmed. (Dkt. No. 14). Plaintiff was advised that he had 14 days to
file objections to the Report and Recommendation and that a failure to file timely objections
would result in limited review by the District Court and waiver of the right to appeal an adverse
decision of the District Court. (Dkt. No. 14 at 15). No timely objections were filed.
Where timely written objections are filed to a District Court from the Report and
Recommendation ofthe Magistrate Judge, the District Court is commanded to make "a de novo
detennination ofthose portions ofthe report ... to which objection is made." 28 U.S.c.
636(b)(1). Where no timely written objection is made to a Report and Recommendation, the
-1­

District Court is required to undertake a review sufficient to determine if there is any clear error
on the face of the Report and Recommendation. Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co.,
416 F.3d 310,315 (4th Cir. 2005).
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, the
decision of the administrative law judge and the administrative record filed in this matter, and
finds that the Report and Recommendation ably and accurately summarizes the factual and legal
issues before the Court and concludes that the decision of the Commissioner is legally proper and
is supported by substantial evidence. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS the Report and
Recommendation as the order of this Court and AFFIRMS the decision of the Commissioner in
this matter.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

Richard Mark Gergel
United States District Judge

OctoberJ&:' 2013
Charleston, South Carolina

-2­