IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION

Cherie Antoinette Hobson, Case No. 6:18-cv-01877-TLW PLAINTIFF v. Order Andrew M. Saul, Commissioner of Social Security, DEFENDANT

This social security matter now comes before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (R&R) filed by the magistrate judge to whom this case was assigned. ECF No. 27. In the R&R, the magistrate judge recommends reversing the Commissioner’s decision and remanding the case. The Commissioner filed a notice informing the Court that no objections would be filed. ECF No. 29. This matter is now ripe for decision. The Court is charged with conducting a review of any portion of the R&R to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in the R&R.

. However, in the absence of objections, the Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. ,

(4th Cir. 1983). In such a case, “a district court need not conduct a 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.’” ,

(4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note). The Court has carefully reviewed the R&R. Having found no clear error on the

face of the record, the R&R is ACCEPTED and the Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED. This case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with the R&R and this order. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Terry L. Wooten Senior United States District Judge February 14, 2020 Columbia, South Carolina