From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Guthrie v. Astrue

United States District Court, S.D. West Virginia, Charleston Division
Aug 27, 2010
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:09-cv-00594 (S.D.W. Va. Aug. 27, 2010)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:09-cv-00594.

August 27, 2010


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER


Before the Court is Plaintiff Jewell Faye Guthrie's Complaint for Review fo the Decision of the Commissioner of Social Security [Docket 2]. By Standing Order entered August 1, 2006, and filed in this case on May 29, 2009, 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 18] on May 27, 2010, recommending that this Court reverse the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security and remand this case for further proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and dismiss this matter from the Court's active 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 Defendant'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 June 14, 2010. To date, no objections have been filed.

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF R [Docket 18], REVERSES the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, REMANDS this case for further proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and DISMISSES this case from the docket. A separate Judgment Order will enter this day implementing the rulings contained herein.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party.


Summaries of

Guthrie v. Astrue

United States District Court, S.D. West Virginia, Charleston Division
Aug 27, 2010
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:09-cv-00594 (S.D.W. Va. Aug. 27, 2010)
Case details for

Guthrie v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:JEWELL FAYE GUTHRIE, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE Commissioner of…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. West Virginia, Charleston Division

Date published: Aug 27, 2010

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:09-cv-00594 (S.D.W. Va. Aug. 27, 2010)

Citing Cases

Travis C. v. Berryhill

See Mosley v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No. 3:14-CV-278, 2015 WL 6857852, at *3 (S.D. Ohio Sept. 14, 2015);…