Teamer v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 17

ORDER adopting 15 Report and Recommendation. The Commissioner's final decision is reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative review as set forth in the Report. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 05/08/2019.(cpeg, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
BEAUFORT DIVISION
Brian Roosevelt Teamer,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
Nancy A. Berryhill,
)
Acting Commissioner of Social Security
)
Administration,
)
)
Defendant.
)
___________________________________ )

Civil Action No. 9:18-cv-1271-TMC
ORDER

Plaintiff, Brian Roosevelt Teamer, brought this action pursuant to 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 (“DIB”) and Supplemental
Security Income (“SSI”) pursuant to 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)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(a)
(D.S.C.). (ECF No. 15). The Report recommends that the Commissioner’s decision be reversed
and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Report. Id. Plaintiff, who is represented
by counsel, has not filed objections to the Report. On May 7, 2019, the Commissioner filed a notice
of her intent not to file any objections to the Report. (ECF No. 16).
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, 270-71 (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 accept the
recommendation.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir.
2005).
After a thorough and careful review of the record, the court adopts the Report of the
Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 15), 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 administrative review as set forth in the Report.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Timothy M. Cain
Timothy M. Cain
United States District Judge
Anderson, South Carolina
May 8, 2019