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

Terrence L.,1 Case No. 1:21-cv-00738-TLW PLAINTIFF v. Order Kilolo Kijakazi, Commissioner of Social Security DEFENDANT

This social security matter now comes before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) filed by the magistrate judge to whom this case was assigned. ECF No. 26. In the Report, 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. 28. This matter is now ripe for decision. The Court is charged with conducting a review of any portion of the Report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in the Report.

. 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,

1 The Committee on Court Administration and Case Management of the Judicial Conference of the United States has recommended that, due to significant privacy concerns in social security cases, federal courts should refer to claimants only by their first names and last initials. 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 Report. Having found no clear error on the face of the record, the Report is ACCEPTED and the Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED. This case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with the Report and this order. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Terry L. Wooten Senior United States District Judge March 24, 2022 Columbia, South Carolina