Meadows v. Astrue

Filing 14

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND REMAND ORDER adopting the 13 Proposed Findings and Recommendation, reversing the final decision of the Commissioner, remanding this case to the Commissioner for further proceedings, and dismissing this case from the docket. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 12/20/2011. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (taq)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
CHARLESTON DIVISION

ICEY MEADOWS,
Plaintiff,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:10-cv-00869

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND REMAND ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Complaint [Docket 2]. By Standing Order entered August 1,
2006, and filed in this case on June 28, 2010, this action was referred to United States Magistrate
Judge Mary E. Stanley for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation (PF&R).
Magistrate Judge Stanley filed her PF&R [Docket 13] on June 21, 2011, recommending that this
Court reverse the final decision of the Commissioner, remand for further proceedings, and dismiss
this case from the Court’s docket.
The Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or
legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the findings or recommendation to
which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Failure to file timely
objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the Petitioner’s right to appeal this Court’s
Order. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir.1989);
United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). In addition, this Court need not conduct
a de novo review when a party “makes general and conclusory objections that do not direct the Court

to a specific error in the magistrate’s proposed findings and recommendations.” Orpiano v.
Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982). Objections to the PF&R in this case were due on July 8,
2011. To date, no objections have been filed.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R [Docket 13], REVERSES the final decision
of the Commissioner, REMANDS this case to the Commissioner for further proceedings, and
DISMISSES this case from the docket.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any
unrepresented party.
ENTER:

2

December 20, 2011