Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Weaver v. Berryhill, 8:17-1381-TMC. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. South Carolina Number: infdco20180809d76 Visitors: 13
Filed: Aug. 08, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 08, 2018
Summary: ORDER TIMOTHY M. CAIN , District Judge . Plaintiff Sandra Denise Weaver brought this action under 42 U.S.C. 405(g), seeking judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner") denying her claim for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act. (ECF No. 1). This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation ("Report") of the United States Magistrate Judge, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) and Local
More

ORDER

Plaintiff Sandra Denise Weaver brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner") denying her claim for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act. (ECF No. 1). This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation ("Report") of the United States Magistrate Judge, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(a), D.S.C. (ECF No. 22). In her Report, the magistrate judge recommends that the Commissioner's decision be reversed and remanded, pursuant to sentence four of § 405(g), for further administrative proceedings. Id. at 18. On Auguast 7, 2018, the Commissioner filed a notice of her intent not to file objections to the Report. (ECF No. 24).

The Report has no presumptive weight and the responsibility to make a final determination in this matter remains with this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). In the absence of objections, this court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the Report. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Rather, "in the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note).

After a thorough and careful review of the record, the court adopts the Report of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 22) which is incorporated herein by reference. The Commissioner's final decision is REVERSED and REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings consistent with the Report.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer