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

TANICKA JONES, on behalf of E.D., No. 1:21-CV-02133 a minor, (Chief Judge Brann) Plaintiff, (Magistrate Judge Carlson) v.

KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

ORDER DECEMBER 13, 2022 Tanicka Jones filed this action on behalf of her minor daughter, E.D., seeking review of a decision by the Acting Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying E.D.’s claim for supplemental security income.1 On November 8, 2022, Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court affirm the Commissioner’s decision and close this case.2 No timely objections were filed to this Report and Recommendation. Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, this Court will review the recommendation only for clear error.3 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.4 Upon review of the record, the Court finds no clear error in Magistrate Judge Carlson’s conclusion

that the Commissioner’s decision is supported by substantial evidence, and that any separation of powers issue does not warrant remand of this matter. Consequently, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson’s Report and Recommendation

(Doc. 22) is ADOPTED; 2. The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED; 3. Final Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant and against Jones

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

3 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).