IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN DIVISION No. 4:24-CV-171-D

TANIA PROSSER, ) Plaintiff, v. ORDER FRANK J. BISIGNANO, Commissioner of Social Security, ) Defendant.

On November 26, 2024, Jennifer Hall (“Hall” or “plaintiff’) filed a complaint against the Commissioner of Social Security [D.E. 1]. On March 20, 2025, plaintiff filed a Social Security brief [D.E. 15]. On April 18, 2025, defendant responded [D.E. 17]. On May 2, 2025, plaintiff replied [D.E. 18]. On May 5, 2025, the court referred the matter to United States Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr. for a memorandum and recommendation [D.E. 19]. See

(b)(1)(B). On October 24, 2025, Magistrate Judge Jones issued a memorandum and recommendation (“M&R”) [D.E. 20]. In the M&R, Magistrate Judge Jones recommended that the court remand the case for further consideration. See id, at 11-12. “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.,

(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 error

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,

(4th Cir. 2017) (quotation omitted); see United States v. Midgette,

(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. 20]. The case is REMANDED for further consideration. SO ORDERED. This □□ day of December, 2025.

United States District Judge