Gaines v. Colvin

Filing 17

ORDER: granting 8 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 11 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting Report and Recommendations re 15 Report and Recommendations. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED, ECF No. 11, and Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, ECF No. 8. The decision of the Commissioner is VACATED and REMANDED for further review. Copy of this Order provided to both parties. Signed by District Judge Raymond A. Jackson on 1/20/2017. (bgra)

FILED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

JAN 2 3 20!?

Norfolk Division
CLERK. U.S. DISTRICT COL IT
NORFOLK. VA

RONALD GAINES,
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:15-cv-549

V.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,

Acting Commissioner of the Social
Security Administration,
Defendant.

ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiff Ronald Gaines's action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking

judicial review of the decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
("Commissioner") that denied his claim for a period of disability, disability insurance benefits,
and disabled widower's benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. On February 23, 2016,
this matter was referred to United Slates Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask ("Magistrate Judge

Krask") pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), (C) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure for a report and recommendation. ECF No. 6.
On March 24, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 8. On
April 27, 2016, the Commissioner filed a motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 11. On
December 22, 2016, Magistrate Judge Krask filed his report and recommended that the
Commissioner's motion be denied, that Plaintiffs motion be granted, and that the
Commissioner's decision be vacated and remanded for further proceedings. ECFNo, 18. By

copy of the report, cach party was advised of their right to file written objections to the findings
I

and recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge within 14 days from the date of the mailing
of the report.

The Court has received no objections to the report, and the time for filing the same has

expired. "[I]n 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.'"
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). Findingno clear error, the Court does hereby accept
the findings and recommendations set forth in the report and recommendations of Magistrate
Judge Krask.

Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED, ECF No. 11, and Plaintiffs
Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, ECF No. 8. The decision of the Commissioner

is VACATED and REMANDED for further review. The Cleric is DIRECTED to provide a
copy of this Order to both parties.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Norfolk, Virginia
January
,2017

Raymond A. Jai

United states District Judge