Judy L. Heflin appeals the district court’s order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to affirm the Commissioner’s denial of social security disability benefits. On appeal, Heflin maintains that the Commissioner’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence because the Administrative Law Judge allegedly ignored the treating physician’s opinion without providing an explanation for doing so. We affirm.

We must uphold the district court’s disability determination if it is supported by substantial evidence. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2000); Hays v. Sullivan, 907 F.2d 1453, 1456 (4th Cir. 1990). We have reviewed the record in light of Heflin’s arguments on appeal and find no reversible error. Furthermore, we find sufficient evidence in the record to support the Commissioner’s decision to deny benefits. Accordingly, we affirm. We dis *124 pense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED