Summary
upholding a finding of no deficits in adaptive functioning where the ALJ explained, among other factors, that the claimant was able to "testify and respond appropriately to questions asked at the hearing"
Summary of this case from Weatherford v. ColvinOpinion
Civil Action No.: 6:12-cv-2099-JMC
08-01-2013
Kimberly N. Chapman, Plaintiff, v. Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court for review of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation ("Report") [Dkt. No. 21], regarding Plaintiff Kimberly N. Chapman's ("Plaintiff) claim for Social Security's Supplemental Security Income Benefits. Plaintiff filed the instant action seeking judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration ("Commissioner"). The Magistrate Judge recommended that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed. Plaintiff has not filed an objection to the Report and the time to do so has expired.
The Magistrate Judge's Report is made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina. In the absence of objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, this court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the recommendation. 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). Furthermore, failure to file specific written objections to the Report results in a party's waiver of the right to appeal from the judgment of the District Court based upon such recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984).
After a thorough review of the record, the court finds the Magistrate Judge's Report provides an accurate summary of the facts and law in the instant case. The court ACCEPTS the Magistrate Judge's Report [Dkt. No. 21] and incorporates it herein by reference. For the reasons set out in the Report, the Commissioner's final decision is AFFIRMED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
United States District Judge August 1, 2013
Greenville, South Carolina