Opinion
C.A. #4:16-3949-PMD
02-12-2018
Daniel Edward Dill, Plaintiff, v. Nancy A. Berryhill, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
ORDER
This social security case is before the Court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that the decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration be reversed with a remand of the cause to the Commissioner. The record includes a report and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge made in accordance with this Court's Order of Reference and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate judge's report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge's report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984). No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge's report.
Defendant filed a Notice of Not Filing Objections on February 8, 2018. --------
A review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the magistrate judge's report is incorporated into this Order. For the reasons articulated by the magistrate judge, the decision of the Commissioner is hereby reversed under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and remanded to the Commissioner for further action consistent with the findings in the Report and Recommendation, and
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/_________
PATRICK MICHAEL DUFFY
United States District Judge February 12, 2018
Charleston, South Carolina