Dawn V.L. v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Full title: DAWN V.L.,[1] Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

Court: United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Harrisonburg Division

Date published: Mar 31, 2023

Civil Action 5:21-cv-00052 (W.D. Va. Mar. 31, 2023)

Opinion

Civil Action 5:21-cv-00052

03-31-2023

DAWN V.L.,[1] Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

ELIZABETH K. DILLON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER

ELIZABETH K. DILLON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

In this social security case, defendant the Commissioner of Social Security (Commissioner) moved for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 (Dkt. No. 22), and plaintiff Dawn V.L. filed a brief in support of remand (Dkt. No. 21). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), the court referred the matter to U.S. Magistrate Judge Joel C. Hoppe for a report and recommendation (R&R).

On March 15, 2023, the magistrate judge issued his R&R, recommending that the court deny the Commissioner's motion for summary judgment, reverse the Commissioner's final decision denying plaintiff's claim for disability insurance benefits (DIB), remand the matter under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and dismiss this case from the court's active docket. (R&R 25, Dkt. No. 24.) The magistrate judge also advised the parties of their right under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) to file written objections to his proposed findings and recommendations within 14 days of service of the R&R. (Id. at 25-26.)

The deadline to object to the R&R has passed, and no party has filed an objection. “[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must ‘only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.'” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory committee's note).

Upon reviewing the record, the court is satisfied that there is no clear error. Accordingly, the court hereby ORDERS as follows:

1. The R&R (Dkt. No. 24) is ADOPTED;

2. The Commissioner's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 22) is DENIED;

3. The Commissioner's final decision is REVERSED; and

4. This matter is REMANDED for further administrative proceedings under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

An appropriate judgment order will be entered.