Thomas v. Colvin, 3:14cv543. (2016)
Court: District Court, W.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20160510c44
Visitors: 5
Filed: May 09, 2016
Latest Update: May 09, 2016
Summary: ORDER GRAHAM C. MULLEN , District Judge . This matter is before the Court upon the memorandum and recommendation of United States Magistrate David C. Keesler, filed March 8, 2016. The parties were advised that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C), written objections to the memorandum and recommendation must be filed within 14 days after service of the memorandum. It appears to the court that the parties have not filed any such objections. After an independent and thorough review of the mag
Summary: ORDER GRAHAM C. MULLEN , District Judge . This matter is before the Court upon the memorandum and recommendation of United States Magistrate David C. Keesler, filed March 8, 2016. The parties were advised that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C), written objections to the memorandum and recommendation must be filed within 14 days after service of the memorandum. It appears to the court that the parties have not filed any such objections. After an independent and thorough review of the magi..
More
ORDER
GRAHAM C. MULLEN, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court upon the memorandum and recommendation of United States Magistrate David C. Keesler, filed March 8, 2016. The parties were advised that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), written objections to the memorandum and recommendation must be filed within 14 days after service of the memorandum. It appears to the court that the parties have not filed any such objections.
After an independent and thorough review of the magistrate's memorandum, the court concludes that there is no clear error on the face of the record and that the recommendation to deny Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, deny the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, vacate the Commissioner's determination, and remand for a new hearing is correct and in accordance with law. Accordingly, the findings and conclusions of the magistrate are accepted, Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED, and the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is likewise DENIED. The Commissioner's decision is hereby VACATED and this matter is hereby REMANDED for a new hearing.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the memorandum and recommendation of the magistrate is hereby AFFIRMED.
Source: Leagle
