Jacob Baker v. Commissioner of Soc Sec, No. 14-1243 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1243 JACOB BAKER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (8:14-cv-00113-JMC) Submitted: July 11, 2014 Decided: July 15, 2014 Before WILKINSON, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jacob Baker, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jacob Baker appeals from the district court s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his civil action. Two days after the district court issued Baker its district dismissal court order, asserting that he filed did not a letter timely with the receive the magistrate judge s report and recommendation and, thus, he did not have the district opportunity court acted to file upon objections. Baker s filing, Before Baker the filed correspondence with this court, which was construed as a notice of appeal. The timely filing of objections is necessary to preserve appellate review of a district court s order adopting the recommendation. Cir. 1985). See Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th If Baker did not timely receive the report and recommendation, he was thereby prevented from obtaining de novo review of the recommendation by an Article III judge. See Orpiano v. Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 47-48 (4th Cir. 1982). In light of Baker s assertion that he did not timely receive the report and recommendation, we remand the case to the district court correspondence so as it a may Fed. construe R. Civ. reconsideration of the dismissal order. the P. 59(e) 21, motion 2014 for We express no opinion as to whether reconsideration is warranted. 2 February We dispense with oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal contentions are before this and court argument would not aid the decisional process. REMANDED 3
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.
