IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ANGELA LADIKA, No. 3:20-CV-00493

Plaintiff, (Chief Judge Brann)

v. (Magistrate Judge Saporito)

KILOLO KIJAKAZI,1 Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

ORDER JULY 11, 2022 Angela Ladika filed this action seeking review of a decision by the Acting Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying Ladika’s claim for social security disability benefits.2 On June 17, 2022, Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr. issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court affirm the Commissioner’s decision and close this case.3 No timely objections were filed to this Report and Recommendation.

1 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), Kilolo Kijakazi, as the successor officer to Andrew Saul, Commissioner of Social Security, is automatically substituted as Defendant in this action. Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, this Court will review the recommendation only for clear error.4 Regardless of whether timely

objections are made, district courts may accept, reject, or modify—in whole or in part—the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.5 Upon review of the record, the Court finds no clear error in Magistrate Judge Saporito’s

conclusion that the Commissioner’s decision is supported by substantial evidence. Consequently, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr.’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 18) is ADOPTED;

2. The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED; 3. Final Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant and against Ladika pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 58 and sentence four of

(g);

and 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Matthew W. Brann Matthew W. Brann Chief United States District Judge

4 Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see Henderson v. Carlson,

(3d Cir. 1987) (explaining that court should in some manner review recommendations regardless of whether objections were filed).