Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-cv-06590
08-21-2017
KENNETH EARL GEISSLER, Plaintiff, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff Kenneth Earl Geissler's ("Claimant") Complaint seeking review of the decision of then Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Carolyn W. Colvin ("Defendant") (ECF No. 1). By Standing Order entered January 4, 2016, and filed in this case on July 22, 2016, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation ("PF&R"). Magistrate Judge Tinsley filed his PF&R (ECF No. 10) on July 31, 2017, recommending that this Court GRANT Claimant's Brief in Support of Judgment on the Pleadings to the extent it seeks remand, DENY the Defendant's Brief in Support of the Final Decision, REVERSE the final decision of the Commissioner, REMAND this case for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 § U.S.C. 405(g), and DISMISS this matter from the Court's docket.
Nancy A. Berryhill became the Acting Commissioner of Social Security on January 23, 2017, replacing the former Social Security Commissioner, Carolyn W. Colvin, the original Defendant in this case. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Ms. Berryhill is automatically substituted as the Defendant. --------
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 August 17, 2017. To date, no objections have been filed.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R (ECF No. 10), GRANTS Claimant's Brief for Judgment on the Pleadings (ECF No. 7) to the extent it seeks remand, DENIES Defendant's Brief in Support of the Final Decision (ECF No. 8), REVERSES the final decision of the Commissioner, REMANDS this case for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 § U.S.C. 405(g), DISMISSES this matter, and DIRECTS the Clerk to remove this case from the Court's 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: August 21, 2017
/s/_________
THOMAS E. JOHNSTON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE