Evans v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Filing
16
ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION adopting 11 Report and Recommendation, reversing the decision of the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and remanding the matter for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Richard M. Gergel on 11/01/2016. (bshr, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Shannon K. Evans,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner
of Social Security,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No. 1:15-3687-RMG
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court for judicial review of the final decision of the
Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiff's application for Disability Insurance Benefits
("DIB"). In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was
referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for pretrial handling. The Magistrate Judge issued
a Report and Recommendation on October 13,2016 recommending that the decision of the
Commissioner be reversed and remanded to the agency because a failure to weigh the opinions of
Plaintiffs treating physician in accord with the standards of the Treating Physician Rule, 20
C.F.R. § 404.1527. (Dkt. No. 11). The Commissioner has filed a response to the Magistrate
Judge's Report and Recommendation indicating that she will file no objections. (Dkt. No. 14).
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and the record evidence and finds that
the Magistrate Judge has ably addressed the factual and legal issues in this matter. Therefore, the
Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation as the order of this Court, REVERSES the
decision of the Commissioner pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and REMANDS
-1
the matter to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this order.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
United States District Judge
Charleston, South Carolina
November -.1,2016
-2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?