Witt v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 27

ORDER RULING ON 23 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 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. Signed by Honorable Richard M Gergel on 04/19/2018. (egra, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Jana Crawford Witt,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
Nancy A. Berrryhill, Acting Commissioner )
of Social Security,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)

Civil Action No. 9:17-379-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"). 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 March 29, 2018, recommending that the decision of
the Commissioner be reversed and remanded to the agency because no fact finder had weighed
and reconciled new and material evidence offered for the first time to the Appeals Council by
Plaintiffs primary treating physician, Dr. John Holman, as required by Meyer v. Astrue, 662 F.
3d 700 (4 1h Cir. 2011). (Dkt. No. 23). Additional new and material evidence from Dr. Holman
was also provided to the Court during the pendency of this appeal. (Dkt. No. 19-2). This new
evidence corroborates Plaintiffs testimony regarding her limited capacity to sit, stand and walk
due to her multiple severe impairments and addresses the Administrative Law Judge's concern
that no treating physician of the claimant had placed any restrictions on her. (Tr. 21 , 979; Dkt.

-1-

No. 19-2). The Commissioner has advised the Court that she does not intend to file objections
to the R & R. (Dkt. No. 25).
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
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.

Richard Mark Gergel
United States District Judge

Charleston, South Carolina
April I '1, 2018

-2-