Summary
holding that "[t]he Sims Court did not address whether a claimant would waive judicial review by failure to raise an issue before the ALJ."
Summary of this case from Flack v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.Opinion
CASE NO. 1:13 CV 2026
07-07-2014
Rick Duane Benedict, Plaintiff, v. Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
JUDGE DONALD C. NUGENT
MAGISTRATE JUDGE VERNELIS
ARMSTRONG
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Vemelis Armstrong. (ECF #15). Plaintiff brought this case seeking review of the Defendant's final decision denying his claim for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. The Magistrate Judge recommends that: (1) this case be reversed and remanded, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for consideration/reconciliation at steps three and four of the sequential evaluation and to determine if Plaintiff is disabled; and (2) the Court terminate the referral to the undersigned. On April 10, 2014, Defendant Commissioner of Social Security filed a Response to the Report and Recommendation stating that an objection would not be filed. (ECF #16).
Standard of Review for a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation
The applicable standard of review for a magistrate judge's report and recommendation depends upon whether objections were made to the report. In this case, neither party has filed any objection to the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation. "When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." FED. R. CIV. P. 72 advisory committee's notes (citation omitted) In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court stated in Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985): "It does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate judge's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings." Nonetheless, this Court has thoroughly reviewed the Report and Recommendation's factual and legal conclusions and finds them to be thorough, well-supported, and correct.
Conclusion
For the reasons set forth above, the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Armstrong (ECF #15) is ADOPTED in its entirety. The Administrative Law Judge's decision is REVERSED, and pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) the case is REMANDED, for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
__________
DONALD C. NUGENT
United States District Judge