The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Kosik
NOW, this 30th day of June, 2008, it appearing to the court that:
(1) On August 2, 2007, the plaintiff filed the above-styled action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to seek review of the defendant's decision to deny the plaintiff's claim for Supplemental Security Income;
(2) This matter was assigned to Magistrate Judge Malachy E. Mannion;
(3) The parties filed appropriate briefs, and the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation on June 4, 2008;
(4) In the Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge concluded that the decision of the ALJ was supported by substantial evidence and he recommended that the plaintiff's appeal be denied;
(5) Neither the plaintiff nor the defendant filed objections to the Report and Recommendation;
AND, IT FURTHER APPEARING THAT:
(6) If no objections are filed to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, the plaintiff is not statutorily entitled to a de novo review of his claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150--53 (1985). Nonetheless, the usual practice of the district court is to give "reasoned consideration" to a magistrate judge's report prior to adopting it. See Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987).
(7) Having considered the Magistrate Judge's Report, we agree with the recommendation; ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
(1) The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Malachy E. Mannion dated June 4, 2008 is ADOPTED;
(2) The plaintiff's appeal is DENIED; and
(3) The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case and to FORWARD a copy of this Memorandum and ...