SHOCKLEY v. COLVIN, 2:14-1699-RMG. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. South Carolina
Number: infdco20150710c23
Visitors: 13
Filed: Jul. 09, 2015
Latest Update: Jul. 09, 2015
Summary: ORDER RICHARD MARK GERGEL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court for judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiffs application for Disability Insurance Benefits ("DIB"). In accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for pretrial handling. The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation ("R & R") on June 16, 2015 recommending that the d
Summary: ORDER RICHARD MARK GERGEL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court for judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiffs application for Disability Insurance Benefits ("DIB"). In accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for pretrial handling. The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation ("R & R") on June 16, 2015 recommending that the de..
More
ORDER
RICHARD MARK GERGEL, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court for judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiffs application for Disability Insurance Benefits ("DIB"). In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for pretrial handling. The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation ("R & R") on June 16, 2015 recommending that the decision of the Commissioner be reversed and remanded to the agency. (Dkt. No. 17). The Commissioner has filed a response to the Magistrate Judge's R & R indicating that she will file no objections. (Dkt. No. 18).
The Court has reviewed the R & R and the record evidence and finds that the Magistrate Judge has ably addressed the factual and legal issues in this matter. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation as the order of this Court, REVERSES the decision ofthe Commissioner pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and REMANDS the matter to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this order.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
