Metz v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Full title: SALLY R. METZ, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA ELKINS

Date published: Dec 2, 2014

Civil Action No. 2:14-CV-56 (N.D.W. Va. Dec. 2, 2014)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 2:14-CV-56

12-02-2014

SALLY R. METZ, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

The Honorable John Preston Bailey

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

On this day, the above-styled matter came before this Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge John S. Kaull [Doc. 13]. Pursuant to this Court's Local Rules, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Kaull for submission of a proposed report and a recommendation ("R & R"). Magistrate Judge Kaull filed his R & R on November 6, 2014, wherein he recommends that the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment be denied, and Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment be granted.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(c), this Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions of the magistrate judge's findings to which objection is made. However, 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. Thomas v. Am, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). In addition, failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the right to appeal this Court's Order. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363,1366 (4th Cir, 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Here, objections to Magistrate Judge Kaull's R & R were due within fourteen (14) days of receipt, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). The docket reflects that R & R was entered on November 6, 2014. [Doc. 13]. No objections have been filed. Accordingly, this Court will review the R&R for clear error.

Upon careful review of the above, it is the opinion of this Court that the Report and Recommendation [Doc. 13] should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated in the magistrate judge's report. Therefore, the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 11] is DENIED, Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 9] is GRANTED and this action is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further action in accordance with the R & R.

It is so ORDERED.

The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to all counsel of record herein. DATED: December 2, 2014.

/s/_________

JOHN PRESTON BAILEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE