CARTER v. SAUL

Filing 30

ORDER signed by JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR on 9/27/2021; that the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation, (Doc. 24 ), is ADOPTED. FURTHER ORDERED that the Commissioner's decision finding no disability is REVER SED and that the matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The Commissioner is directed to remand the matter to the Administrative Law Judge for further administrative proceedings consistent with the Recom mendation. To this extent, the Commissioner's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, (Doc. 21 ), is DENIED and Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, (Doc. 18 ), is GRANTED to the extent set out in the Recommendation. A judgment dismissing this action will be entered contemporaneously with this Order. (Hicks, Samantha)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
TRACY CARTER,
Plaintiff,
v.
KILOLO KIJAKAZI,1
Acting Commissioner of
Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:20CV252

ORDER
This matter is before this court for review of the
Memorandum Opinion and Recommendation filed on September 1,
2021, by the Magistrate Judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b). (Doc. 24.) In the Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge
recommends that the Commissioner’s decision finding no
disability be reversed, and that the matter be remanded to the
Commissioner under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The
Magistrate Judge further recommends that Defendant’s Motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings, (Doc. 21), should be denied and that

1

Kilolo Kijakazi became the Acting Commissioner of Social
Security on July 9, 2021. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, Kilolo Kijakazi should be substituted,
therefore, for Andrew Saul as the defendant in this suit. No
further action need be taken to continue this suit by reason of
the last sentence of section 205(g) of the Social Security Act,
42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, (Doc. 18), should be
granted. The Recommendation was served on the parties to this
action on September 1, 2021. (Doc. 25.) Counsel for Defendant
filed timely objections, (Doc. 26), to the Recommendation, and
Plaintiff responded, (Doc. 27), to Defendant’s objections.
This court is required to “make a de novo determination of
those portions of the [Magistrate Judge’s] report o r specified
proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is
made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). This court “may accept, reject, or
modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations
made by the [M]agistrate [J]udge. . . .

[O]r recommit the

matter to the [M]agistrate [J]udge with instructions.” Id.
This court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the
Recommendation to which objections were made and has made a de
novo determination which is in accord with the Magistrate
Judge’s Recommendation. This court therefore adopts the
Recommendation.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s
Recommendation, (Doc. 24), is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that
the Commissioner’s decision finding no disability is REVERSED and
that the matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner under sentence
four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The Commissioner is directed to
remand the matter to the Administrative Law Judge for further
-2-

administrative proceedings consistent with the Recommendation. To
this extent, the Commissioner’s Motion for Judgment on the
Pleadings, (Doc. 21), is DENIED and Plaintiff’s Motion for
Summary Judgment, (Doc. 18), is GRANTED to the extent set out in
the Recommendation.
A judgment dismissing this action will be entered
contemporaneously with this Order.
This the 27th day of September, 2021.

_____________________________________
United States District Judge

-3-