Malachi v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

Filing 19

ORDER RULING ON 17 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION It is ordered that the Commissioner's final decision is reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 02/11/2016. (egra, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
CHARLESTON DIVISION
Shequita L. Malachi,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 2:14-3334-TMC

ORDER

Plaintiff Shequita L. Malachi (“Malachi”) brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g),
seeking judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security
(“Commissioner”) denying her claim for supplemental security income benefits under the Social
Security Act. This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation
(“Report”) of the United States Magistrate Judge, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(a), D.S.C. (ECF No. 17). The Report recommends
that the Commissioner’s decision be reversed and remanded, pursuant to sentence four of §
405(g), for further proceedings consistent with the Report. Id. Plaintiff has not filed any
objections to the Report, and on February 11, 2016, the Commissioner filed a notice of her intent
not to file any objections to the Report. (ECF No. 18).
The Report has no presumptive weight and the responsibility to make a final
determination in this matter remains with this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 27071 (1976). In the absence of objections, this court is not required to provide an explanation for
adopting the Report. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Rather, “in the
absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but
instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to
1

accept the recommendation.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th
Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note).
After a thorough and careful review of the record, the court adopts the Report. (ECF No.
17). Accordingly, the Commissioner’s final decision is REVERSED and REMANDED
pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings consistent with the
Report.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Timothy M. Cain
Timothy M. Cain
United States District Judge

February 11, 2016
Anderson, South Carolina

2