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

STEPHEN R. KOZICK, No. 3:22-CV-01029

Plaintiff, (Chief Judge Brann)

v. (Magistrate Judge Saporito)

KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

ORDER SEPTEMBER 20, 2023 Stephen R. Kozick filed this action seeking review of a decision of the Acting Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying Kozick’s claim for supplemental security income.1 In August 2023, Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr., issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court affirm the Commissioner’s decision and close this case.2 Kozick filed timely objections to the Report and Recommendation.3 In his objections, Kozick contends that Magistrate Judge Saporito erred in concluding that the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) was not required to order a psychological consulting examination to resolve disparities between the evaluations of record, and

1 Docs. 1, 16. 2 Doc. 19. in finding that Kozick’s activities of daily living supported the ALJ’s assessment of Kozick’s functional limitations.4

“If a party objects timely to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the district court must ‘make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.’”5

Regardless of whether timely objections are made, district courts may accept, reject, or modify—in whole or in part—the magistrate judge’s findings or recommendations.6 Upon de novo review of the record, the Court finds no error in Magistrate Judge Saporito’s conclusion that the Commissioner’s decision is

supported by substantial evidence. Although Kozick disputes some of Magistrate Judge Saporito’s conclusions, Magistrate Judge Saporito correctly determined that, as a whole, substantial evidence supports the Commissioner’s decision.

Consequently, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr.’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 19) is ADOPTED; 2. The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED;

4 Id. 5 Equal Emp’t Opportunity Comm’n v. City of Long Branch,

(3d Cir. 2017) (quoting

(b)(1)). 3. Final Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant and against Kozick 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