UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT BECKLEY

KAREN LYNNE FRYE, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:20-cv-00229 ANDREW SAUL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

Defendant. ORDER Pending are Plaintiff’s Memorandum in Support of Judgment on the Pleadings [Doc. 19], filed December 7, 2020, and the Commissioner’s Brief in Support of Defendant’s Decision [Doc. 20], filed December 16, 2020. This action was previously referred to the Honorable Omar J. Aboulhosn, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation (“PF&R”). Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn filed his PF&R on January 8, 2021. Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn recommended that the Court deny Plaintiff’s request for remand, grant Defendant’s request to affirm the decision of the Commissioner, affirm the final decision of the Commissioner, and dismiss the matter. The Court need not review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the findings or recommendation to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn,

(1985); see also

(b)(1) (“A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”) (emphasis added). Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the Petitioner’s right to appeal the Court’s order. See

(b)(1); see also United States v. De Leon- Ramirez,

(4th Cir. 2019) (parties may not typically “appeal a magistrate judge’s findings that were not objected to below, as § 636(b) doesn’t require de novo review absent objection.”); Snyder v. Ridenour,

(4th Cir. 1989). Further, the Court need not conduct de novo review when a party “makes general and conclusory objections that do not direct the Court to a specific error in the magistrate’s proposed findings and recommendations.” Orpiano v. Johnson,

(4th Cir. 1982). Objections in this case were due on January 25, 2021. No objections were filed. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R [Doc. 21], DENIES Plaintiff's request for remand [Doc. 19], GRANTS the Commissioner’s request to affirm the decision below [Doc. 20], AFFIRMS the final decision of the Commissioner, and DISMISSES the matter. The Court directs the Clerk to transmit a copy of this Order to any counsel of record and any unrepresented party. ENTERED: February 1, 2021

oat aacw. Volk ie United States District Judge