Jones v. Berryhill, No. 1:2016cv09051 - Document 17 (S.D.W. Va. 2017)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The court adopts the 16 Proposed Findings and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge Eifert; GRANTS Plaintiff's 13 MOTION for Summary Judgment to the extent he seeks remand pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. S ection 405(g); DENIES Defendant's 15 Brief in Support of Defendant's Decision; REVERSES the final decision of the Commissioner; REMANDS the case to the Commissioner pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. Section 405(g) for further proceedings; and directs the Clerk to remove this case from the court's active docket. Signed by Senior Judge David A. Faber on 7/27/2017. (cc: counsel of record) (arb)

Download PDF
Jones v. Berryhill Doc. 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT BLUEFIELD RUSSELL JONES, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:16-09051 NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER By Standing Order, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cheryl A. Eifert for submission of findings and recommendation regarding disposition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Magistrate Judge Eifert submitted to the court her Proposed Findings and Recommendation (“PF&R”) on June 15, 2017, in which she recommended that the court grant the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment to the extent that he seeks remand; deny defendant’s request to affirm the Commissioner’s decision; reverse the final decision of the Commissioner, remand the case to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings as outlined in the PF&R; and dismiss this matter from the court’s docket. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), plaintiff was allotted fourteen days and three mailing days in Dockets.Justia.com which to file any objections to Magistrate Judge Eifert's Proposed Findings and Recommendation. The failure of any party to file such objections within the time allowed constitutes a waiver of such party's right to a de novo review by this court. Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363 (4th Cir. 1989). Neither party filed any objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations within the required time period. Accordingly, the court adopts the Findings and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge Eifert as follows: 1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED to the extent he seeks remand pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); 2. Defendant’s Brief in Support of Defendant’s Decision is DENIED; 3. The final decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED; 4. The case is REMANDED to the Commissioner pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings as outlined in the Proposed Findings and Recommendation; and 5. This Clerk is directed to remove this case from the court’s active docket. The Clerk is directed to forward a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to counsel of record. 2 IT IS SO ORDERED this 27th of July, 2017. ENTER: David A. Faber Senior United States District Judge 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.