Filed: Dec. 20, 2016
Latest Update: Dec. 20, 2016
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION JOHN PRESTON BAILEY , District Judge . On this day, the above-styled matter came before this Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael John Aloi [Doc. 16]. Pursuant to this Court's Local Rules, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Aloi for submission of a proposed report and recommendation ("R&R"). Magistrate Judge Aloi filed his R&R on November 30, 2016, wherein he recommends this Cou
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION JOHN PRESTON BAILEY , District Judge . On this day, the above-styled matter came before this Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael John Aloi [Doc. 16]. Pursuant to this Court's Local Rules, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Aloi for submission of a proposed report and recommendation ("R&R"). Magistrate Judge Aloi filed his R&R on November 30, 2016, wherein he recommends this Cour..
More
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
JOHN PRESTON BAILEY, District Judge.
On this day, the above-styled matter came before this Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael John Aloi [Doc. 16]. Pursuant to this Court's Local Rules, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Aloi for submission of a proposed report and recommendation ("R&R"). Magistrate Judge Aloi filed his R&R on November 30, 2016, wherein he recommends this Court deny the defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, grant the plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, and remand to the Commissioner of Social Security.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c), this Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions of the magistrate judge's findings to which objection is made. However, the Court is not required to 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. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). In addition, failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the right to appeal this Court's Order. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Here, objections to Magistrate Judge Aloi's R&R were due within fourteen (14) days of service, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Service was rendered on the November 30, 2016. To date, no objections have been filed. Accordingly, this Court will review the R&R for clear error.
Upon careful review of the above, it is the opinion of this Court that the Report and Recommendation [Doc. 16] should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated in the magistrate judge's report. As such, this Court ORDERS that the defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 13] be DENIED and the plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 11] be GRANTED. Accordingly, this Court hereby REMANDS the plaintiff's Complaint [Doc. 1] to the Commissioner of Social Security. Therefore, this matter is hereby ORDERED STRICKEN from the active docket of this Court.
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to all counsel of record herein.
