Summary
explaining that failure to provide analysis of the plaintiff's fibromyalgia at step three was not harmless error "because the Social Security regulations state that if a person's impairments meet or equal a Listing, she is disabled . . . and would be entitled to benefits with no further analysis required"
Summary of this case from Latoya R. v. SaulOpinion
CASE NO. 1:12 CV 909
07-18-2013
Mary Cashin, Plaintiff, v. Carolyn W. Colvin, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
JUDGE PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN
Memorandum of Opinion and Order
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge George G. Limbert (Doc. 15), recommending that the decision of the Commissioner be REVERSED and this matter REMANDED for further proceedings. No objections have been filed. For the reasons that follow, the Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and this matter REMANDED to defendant for further proceedings.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
When objections are made to a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the district court reviews the case de novo. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) provides in pertinent part:
The district judge to whom the case is assigned shall make a de novo determination upon the record, or after additional evidence, of any portion of the magistrate judge's disposition to which specific written objection has been made in accordance with this rule. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended decision, receive further evidence, or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.
As stated in the Advisory Committee Notes, "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." In Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985), the Court held, "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."
DECISION
This Court, having reviewed the Report and Recommendation and finding no clear error, hereby accepts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. In accordance with that recommendation, the Court hereby REVERSES the decision of the Commissioner and REMANDS this matter for the reasons stated by the Magistrate Judge in the Report and Recommendation, which is incorporated herein by reference.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
________________
PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN
United States District Judge