Summary
remanding where, despite "numerous references to pain and tenderness related to fibromyalgia" in the medical records, "the ALJ did not address Claimant's medically determinable impairment of fibromyalgia, did not assess the severity of the condition, and did not discuss the functional impact of Claimant's fibromyalgia"; noting that "the ALJ's failure to expressly address and rate the severity of Claimant's fibromyalgia cannot possibly be viewed as harmless given that the Court is unable to determine whether the ALJ properly considered the functional impact of Claimant's fibromyalgia at the subsequent steps of the sequential evaluation"
Summary of this case from Haynes v. SaulOpinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:16-cv-01500
01-12-2017
MARY SELENA BERRY, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
By Standing Order (Document 3) entered on February 12, 2016, this action was referred to the Honorable Cheryl A. Eifert, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission to this Court of proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).
On December 22, 2016, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 11) wherein it is recommended that this Court: grant the Plaintiff's request for judgment on the pleadings to the extent that it seeks remand of the Commissioner's decision; deny the Defendant's request to affirm the decision of the Commissioner; reverse the final decision of the Commissioner; remand this matter pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further proceedings consistent with the Proposed Findings and Recommendation; and dismiss this matter with prejudice from the Court's docket.
Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by January 9, 2017, and none were filed by either party. 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. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985); see also Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983) (holding that districts courts may adopt proposed findings and recommendations without explanation in the absence of objections).
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the Proposed Findings and Recommendation. The Court ORDERS that: the Plaintiff's request for judgment on the pleadings (Document 9) be GRANTED to the extent that it seeks remand of the Commissioner's decision; the Defendant's request to affirm the decision of the Commissioner (Document 10) be DENIED; the final decision of the Commissioner be REVERSED; this matter be REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further proceedings consistent with the Proposed Findings and Recommendation; and this matter be DISMISSED with prejudice from the Court's docket.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to Magistrate Judge Eifert, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party.
ENTER: January 12, 2017
/s/_________
IRENE C. BERGER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA