Rodden v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

Filing 26

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The defendant's decision is REVERSED AND REMANDED for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Henry F Floyd on 8/9/2011. (gnan )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
AIKEN DIVISION
THERON ANDREW RODDEN,
Plaintiff,

§
§
§
vs.
§ CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:10-1208-HFF-SVH
§
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
§
Commissioner, Social Security Administration, §
Defendant.
§
ORDER
This case was filed as a 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and § 1383(c)(3) action. Plaintiff is represented
by excellent counsel. The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation
(Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting that Defendant’s decision be reversed and
remanded for further proceedings. The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and
Local Civil Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has
no presumptive weight. The responsibility to make a final determination remains with the Court.
Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo
determination of those portions of the Report to which specific objection is made, and the Court may
accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge or
recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on June 30, 2011, but Defendant indicated on July 13,
2011, that he did not intend to file any objections. In the absence of such objections, the Court is
not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d
198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins,
766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).
After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard set
forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment
of the Court that Defendant’s decision is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings..
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 9th day of August, 2011, in Spartanburg, South Carolina.

s/ Henry F. Floyd
HENRY F. FLOYD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2