Jones v. Colvin

Filing 28

ORDER adopting 27 Memorandum and Recommendations, granting 18 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and denying 24 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The matter is remanded for further proceedings. Signed by Senior Judge James C. Fox on 3/20/2017. (Grady, B.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
No. 5:16-CV-00015-F
SAMUEL LEE JONES,
Plaintiff/Claimant,

v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, 1
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

)

)
)

This matter is before the court on the Memorandum and Recommendation ("M&R") [DE-27]
of United States Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr., regarding the parties' cross motions for
judgment on the pleadings [DE-18, -24], pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has
no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the court.

See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). This court is charged with making a de nova
determination of those portions of the recommendation to which specific objections are made, and
the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the Magistrate Judge's recommendation,
or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b )(1 ). In the
absence of a timely-filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de nova 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." Diamondv. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005).
1

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25( d), Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security, has been added as a party. Carolyn W. Calvin's term expired
on January 20, 2017, and she has been terminated as a party.

On March 2, 2017, the Magistrate Judge issued a M&R recommending that Plaintiffs
Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [DE-18] be ALLOWED, Defendant's Motion for Judgment
on the Pleadings [DE-24] be DENIED, and the matter be remancled for further proceedings. The
Magistrate Judge advised the parties of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the
M&R and the consequences if they failed to do so. The parties have filed no objections, and the time
for doing so expired on March 16, 2017.
Upon careful review of the M&R and of the record generally, and having found no clear
error, this court hereby ADOPTS the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. It is therefore
ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [DE-18] is ALLOWED,
Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [DE-24] is DENIED, and the matter is remanded
for further proceedings.
SO ORDERED.
This~ day of March, 2017.

enior United States District Judge

2