-MCIV Culbertson v. Astrue, No. 0:2007cv01571 - Document 25 (D.S.C. 2008)
Court Description: ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS the Court ACCEPTS the Report and it is ORDERED that the Commissioners decision be AFFIRMED. Signed by Honorable Terry L Wooten on 9/23/08. (bbro, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE DIVISION Clarence A. Culbertson, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) Michael S. Astrue, ) Commissioner of Social Security, ) ) Defendant. ) ) ____________________________________) Civil Action No.:0:07-1571-TLW-GCK ORDER On June 6, 2007, the plaintiff, Clarence A. Culbertson, ( plaintiff ) brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 (g), seeking judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner wherein he was denied disability benefits. This matter now comes before this Court for review of the Report and Recommendation ( the Report ) filed by United States Magistrate Judge George C. Kosko, to whom this case had previously been assigned. (Doc. #21). In the Report, Magistrate Judge Kosko recommends that the decision of the Commissioner be affirmed. (Doc. #21). The plaintiff filed objections to the Report on September 10, 2008. (Doc. #23). On September 23, 2008, the defendant filed a reply to the objections filed by the plaintiff. (Doc. #24). The In conducting this review, the Court applies the following standard: The magistrate judge makes only a recommendation to the Court, to which any party may file written objections...The Court is not bound by the recommendation of the magistrate judge but, instead, retains responsibility for the final determination. The Court is required to make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. However, 1 the Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which no objections are addressed. While the level of scrutiny entailed by the Court's review of the Report thus depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, the Court is free, after review, to accept, reject, or modify any of the magistrate judge's findings or recommendations. Wallace v. Housing Auth. of the City of Columbia, 791 F. Supp. 137, 138 (D.S.C. 1992) (citations omitted). In light of this standard, the Court has reviewed the Report de novo. After careful review of the Report and objections thereto, the Court ACCEPTS the Report. (Doc. #21). Therefore, for the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, it is ORDERED that the Commissioner s decision be AFFIRMED. (Doc. #21). IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Terry L. Wooten Terry L. Wooten United States District Judge September 23, 2008 Florence, South Carolina 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
