From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Busha v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION
Jul 9, 2012
Civil Action No. 2:11-1681 (D.S.C. Jul. 9, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 2:11-1681

07-09-2012

Randy Charles Busha, Plaintiff, v. Michael J. Astrue, Defendant.


ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on a Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge recommending that the decision of the Commissioner denying Social Security disability benefits to Plaintiff be reversed and remanded pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), (Dkt. No. 18). The Defendant has responded that it does not intend to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. (Dkt. No. 19), In a matter referred to a Magistrate Judge for pre-trial handling, as this matter was, the Court is obligated to make a de novo review only of those portions of the Report and Recommendation in which specific objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). In the absence of specific objections, the Court need only make a review for clear error. Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005).

The Court, having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, finds no clear error and hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, (Dkt. No. 18), The decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and REMANDED pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

_____________

Richard Mark Gergel

United States District Court

July 9,2012

Charleston, South Carolina


Summaries of

Busha v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION
Jul 9, 2012
Civil Action No. 2:11-1681 (D.S.C. Jul. 9, 2012)
Case details for

Busha v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:Randy Charles Busha, Plaintiff, v. Michael J. Astrue, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION

Date published: Jul 9, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 2:11-1681 (D.S.C. Jul. 9, 2012)