Wright v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Filing
25
ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION adopting 21 Report and Recommendation. Signed by Honorable Richard M Gergel on 2/9/18. (alew, )
·'
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Romelia Wright,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
Nancy A. Berrryhill, Acting Commissioner )
of Social Security,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)
Civil Action No. 6:16-3943-RMG
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court for judicial review of the final decision of the
Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiffs application for Disability Insurance Benefits
("DIB") and Supplemental Security Income ("SSI"). 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
January 25, 2018, recommending that the decision of the Commissioner be reversed and
remanded to the agency under the authority of Meyer v. Astrue, 662 F.3d 700, 705-06 (41h Cir.
2011) because of the failure of any fact finder to weigh and reconcile medical opinions of a
treating physician submitted for the first time to the Appeals Council. (Dkt No. 21 at 29-32).
The Commissioner has advised the Court that she does not intend to file objections to the R & R.
(Dkt. No. 23).
The Court has reviewed the R & R and the record evidence and finds that the Magistrate
Judge has ably addressed the factual and legal issues in this matter. Therefore, the Court
-1-
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.
United States District Judge
Charleston, South Carolina
February __1, 2018
-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?