Muhammad v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
ORDER: 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 the matter to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this order. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Honorable Richard M Gergel on 1/9/22.(ltap, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Donna J. Muhammad,
Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner
of Social Security,
Civil Action No. 5:20-2516-RMG
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 (“R & R”) on December 28, 2021, recommending
that the decision of the Commissioner be reversed and remanded to the agency because the
Administrative Law Judge’s failure to address the opinions of Plaintiff’s treating physician, Dr.
Verrabago, regarding the need for work place accommodations and unscheduled restroom breaks
in the determination of Plaintiff’s RFC and the erroneous finding of the ALJ that Plaintiff was
not on mental health medications in assessing her subjective complaints. (Dkt. No. 25 at 17, 21).
The Commissioner has advised the Court that she does not intend to file objections to the R & R.
(Dkt. No. 26).
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 the matter to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
S/ Richard Mark Gergel
Richard Mark Gergel
United States District Judge
Charleston, South Carolina
January 9, 2022
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?