West v. Colvin, No. 2:2015cv11551 - Document 14 (S.D.W. Va. 2016)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting the 13 Proposed Findings and Recommendations by Magistrate Judge, granting Defendant's 11 Motion for Remand, remanding this case for further proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), dismissing this case, and directing the Clerk to remove this matter from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 7/27/2016. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (tmh)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION MICHAEL LEWIS WEST, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:15-cv-11551 CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Remand. (ECF No. 11.) By Standing Order filed in this case on July 29, 2015, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for submission of proposed findings and recommendations for disposition. (ECF No. 4.) On June 27, 2016, Magistrate Judge Tinsley filed proposed findings and recommendations for disposition (the “PF&R”), in which he recommends that the Court grant the Motion for Remand, remand this case for further proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and dismiss this matter from the Court’s docket. (ECF No. 13.) The Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the findings or recommendation to which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the parties’ right to appeal this Court’s order. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Objections to the PF&R in this case were due by July 14, 2016. (See ECF No. 13 at 2.) To date, no objections have been filed. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R, (ECF No. 13), GRANTS Defendant’s Motion for Remand, (ECF No. 11), REMANDS this case for further proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), DISMISSES this case, and DIRECTS the Clerk to remove this matter from the Court’s docket. IT IS SO ORDERED. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party. ENTER: July 27, 2016
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
