IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT : FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION □ No. 5:25-CV-9-D □ JENNIFER HALL, ) □ Plaintiff,

FRANK J. BISIGNANO, □ Commissioner of Social Security, ) □ Defendant.

On January 7, 2025, Jennifer Hall (“Hall” or “plaintiff’) filed a complaint against the □

Commissioner of Social Security [D.E. 1]. On April 4, 2025, plaintiff filed a Social Security brief [D.E. 9]. On May 5, 2024, defendant responded [D.E. 11]. On May 9, 2025, plaintiff replied [D.E. 12]. On May 12, 2025, the court referred the matter to United States Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers, II for a memorandum and recommendation [D.E. 13]. See

(b)(1)(B). On September 25, 2025, Magistrate Judge Numbers issued a memorandum and | recommendation (“M&R”) [D.E. 14]. In the M&R, Magistrate Judge Numbers commended that | the court grant plaintiff’s motion for relief and remand the case for further consideration. —

at 17. “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.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co.,

, 315 | (4th Cir. 2005) (cleaned up); see

(b). Absent a timely objection, “a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear □□□□□

on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Diamond,

(quotation omitted). In “order to preserve for appeal an issue in a magistrate judge’s report, a party must object to the finding or recommendation on that issue with sufficient specificity so as □ reasonably to alert the district court of the true ground for the objection.” Martin v. Duffy, 858 □ F.3d 239, 245 (4th Cir. 2017) (quotation omitted); see United States v. Midgette,

, | 622 (4th Cir. 2007). □ Neither party objected to the M&R. Therefore, the court reviews for clear error. The court | has reviewed the M&R and the record. There is no clear error on the face of the record. See □ Diamond,

. : In sum, the court ADOPTS the conclusions in the M&R [D.E. 14] and GRANTS plaintiffs motion for relief [D.E. 9]. The case is REMANDED for further consideration. SO ORDERED. This □□ day of December, 2025.

United States District Judge !