McNeill v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. North Carolina

McNeill v. Kijakazi

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No. 5:20-cv-00244-M ALICIA MCNEILL, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ORDER KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting ) Commissioner of Social Security, ) ) Defendant. ) On June 2, 2021, Magistrate Judge Jones issued a memorandum and recommendation (the “M&R”). [DE-21] Within the M&R, Judge Jones recommended that the court: (1) grant Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings [DE-17]; (2) deny Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings [DE-19]; and (3) remand the matter to Defendant for further proceedings. [DE-21] The deadline for Defendant to object to the M&R has passed, and Defendant has not filed any objections. The Fourth Circuit has said: The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to make a de novo determination of those portions of the magistrate judge’s report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made. By contrast, in 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 vy. Colonial Life & Accident Ins, Co.,

416 F.3d 310, 315

(4th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation marks, brackets, emphases, and citations omitted); see

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72.

The court has reviewed the M&R and the record and is satisfied that there is no clear error reflected on the face thereof. Accordingly, the court ADOPTS the M&R and GRANTS Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings, DENIES Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, and REMANDS the matter to Defendant for further proceedings consistent with the M&R and this order.

SO ORDERED this the l gf day of LL 44 baat , 2021. 5 oa £ /V| yes Ll RICHARD E. MYERS Ii CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Reference

Status
Unknown