Minor v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 34

ORDER RULING ON 29 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION The court adopts the Report of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 29) which is incorporated herein by reference. 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. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 03/12/2018. (egra, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
BEAUFORT DIVISION
Peyton Minor,
Plaintiff,
v.
Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No. 9:17-1087-TMC

ORDER

Plaintiff Peyton Minor, proceeding pro se, 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 his claim for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security
Act. (ECF No. 1). 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. 29). In his Report, the
magistrate judge recommends that the Commissioner’s decision be reversed and remanded,
pursuant to sentence four of § 405(g), for further administrative proceedings. Id. at 15. On
February 23, 2018, the Commissioner filed a notice of her intent not to file objections to the
Report. (ECF No. 31). Plaintiff has not filed any objections to the Report, and the time to do so
has now run.
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
1

instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to
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 of the
Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 29) which is incorporated herein by reference. 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
United States District Judge

March 12, 2018
Anderson, South Carolina

2