Bailey v. Colvin

Filing 18

ORDER accepting and incorporating the 17 Proposed Findings and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge; directing that the Plaintiff's 11 motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED to the extent that it requests remand of the Commissio ner's decision; the Defendant's 14 request to affirm the decision of the Commissioner is DENIED; the final decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED; this matter is REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative proceedings consistent with this PF&R; and this action is DISMISSED from the docket of the Court. Signed by Judge Joseph R. Goodwin on 8/29/2017. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (taq)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
CHARLESTON DIVISION
HAROLD GENE BAILEY,
Plaintiff,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-cv-07044

NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
ORDER
This action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cheryl A. Eifert
for submission of proposed findings of fact and recommendations for disposition
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On July 6, 2017, Judge Eifert submitted her Proposed
Findings & Recommendations [ECF No. 17] (“PF&R”) and recommended that the
court GRANT Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings [ECF No. 11] to the
extent that it requests remand of the Commissioner’s decision; DENY Defendant’s
request to affirm the decision of the Commissioner [ECF No. 14]; REVERSE the final
decision of the Commissioner; REMAND this matter pursuant to sentence four of 42
U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative proceedings consistent with this PF&R;
and DISMISS this action from the docket of the Court. Neither party timely filed
objections to the PF&R nor sought an extension of time.

A district court “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the
report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). This court is not, however, 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).
Because the parties have not filed objections in this case, the court accepts and
incorporates herein the PF&R and orders judgment consistent therewith. The court
ORDERS that the Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings [ECF No. 11] is
GRANTED to the extent that it requests remand of the Commissioner’s decision; the
Defendant’s request to affirm the decision of the Commissioner [ECF No. 14] is
DENIED; the final decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED; this matter is
REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further
administrative proceedings consistent with this PF&R; and this action is
DISMISSED from the docket of the Court
The court further DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel
of record and any unrepresented party.
ENTER:

2

August 29, 2017