Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Butler v. Berryhill, 6:17-cv-01752-TLW. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. South Carolina Number: infdco20181004c39 Visitors: 9
Filed: Oct. 01, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 01, 2018
Summary: ORDER TERRY L. WOOTEN , Chief District Judge . Plaintiff Debra Butler brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405(g), seeking judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security's final decision denying Plaintiff's claims for disability insurance benefits. ECF No. 1. This matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (R&R) filed by United States Magistrate Judge McDonald, ECF No. 16, to whom this case was previously assigned pursuant to the provisions of 28 U
More

ORDER

Plaintiff Debra Butler brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security's final decision denying Plaintiff's claims for disability insurance benefits. ECF No. 1. This matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (R&R) filed by United States Magistrate Judge McDonald, ECF No. 16, to whom this case was previously assigned pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2), (D.S.C.). In the R&R, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the decision of the Commissioner be reversed and the case be remanded for further administrative action consistent with the R&R. The Commissioner filed a notice that she did not object to the R&R, ECF No. 18, and no other objections were filed.

This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Report to which a specific objection is registered and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that Report. See 28 U.S.C. § 636. In the absence of objections to the R&R, this Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983).

In light of the standard above, this Court has carefully reviewed the Magistrate Judge's R&R. Noting that no objections were received, the R&R is hereby ACCEPTED. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, the Commissioner's decision is reversed, and this case is remanded for further administrative action consistent with the R&R.

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