Brice
v.
Berryhill

This case is not covered by Casetext's citator
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE DIVISIONSep 11, 2018
C/A No. 4:17-2210-TMC (D.S.C. Sep. 11, 2018)

C/A No. 4:17-2210-TMC

09-11-2018

George Brice, Plaintiff, v. Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant.


ORDER

Plaintiff George Brice ("Brice") brought this action under 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 under the Social Security Act. 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) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(a), D.S.C. (ECF No. 16). The Report recommends that the Commissioner's decision be reversed and remanded, pursuant to sentence four of § 405(g), for further proceedings consistent with the Report. Id. at 10. On September 10, 2018, the Commissioner filed a notice of her intent not to file objections to the Report. (ECF No. 18).

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 & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note).

After a thorough and careful review of the record, the court adopts the Report of the Magistrate Judge 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 proceedings consistent with the Report.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Timothy M. Cain


United States District Judge September 11, 2018
Anderson, South Carolina