Lee v. Colvin

Filing 19

ORDER - Before the Court is Plaintiff Gregory Lee's action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of the decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration that denied his claim for a period of disability and disa bility insurance benefits. On June 7,2016, Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 13 . On July 7,2016, the Commissioner filed a motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 15 . On November 29, 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 review. ECF No. 18 . The Court has received no objections to the report, and the time for filing the same has expired. Finding no 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 i s DENIED, ECF No. 15, and Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, ECF No. 13. The decision of the Commissioner is VACATED and REMANDED for further review. The Clerk is DIRECTED to provide a copy of this Order to both parties. Signed by District Judge Raymond A. Jackson on 12/20/2016. (cchr)

fIEed
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Norfolk Division

BSC "21

GREGORY LEE,
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-cv-61

V.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of the Social
Security Administration,
Defendant.

ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiff Gregory Lee'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 and disability insurance
benefits. On April 19, 2016, this matter was referred to United States 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.

On June 7,2016, Plaintiff filed a motion for summaryjudgment. ECF No. 13. On July
7,2016, the Commissioner filed a motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 15. On November
29,2016, 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 review. ECF No. 18. By copy of the report, each party was

advised of their right to file writtenobjections to the findings and recommendations made by the
Magistrate Judge within 14 days from the date of the mailing of the report.
1

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). Finding no clear error, the Court does herebyaccept
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. 15, and Plaintiffs
Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, ECF No. 13. The decision of the Commissioner
is VACATED and REMANDED for further review. The Clerk is DIRECTED to provide a
copy of this Order to both parties.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
T—f

Norfolk, Virginia

December ,^^,2016

Raymond A.

•elates District Judge