Hughes v. Kijakazi, No. 1:2021cv00364 - Document 25 (S.D.W. Va. 2022)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting the 22 Proposed Findings and Recommendations by Magistrate Judge; granting 18 MOTION by Melissa Hughes for Judgment on the Pleadings to the extent she seeks remand of the Commissioner's decision; denyin g Defendant's request to affirm the Commissioner's decision; reversing the final decision of the Commissioner; remanding the case to the Commissioner for further proceedings; and dismissing this matter with prejudice. Signed by Senior Judge David A. Faber on 4/28/2022. (cc: counsel of record) (mk)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Hughes v. Kijakazi Doc. 25 Case 1:21-cv-00364 Document 25 Filed 04/28/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 1019 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT BLUEFIELD MELISSA HUGHES, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:21-00364 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, 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 March 7, 2022, in which she recommended that the court grant the plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings to the extent that it seeks remand of the Commissioner’s decision; 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 with prejudice. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), plaintiff was allotted fourteen days and three mailing days in which to file any objections to Magistrate Judge Eifert's Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:21-cv-00364 Document 25 Filed 04/28/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1020 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 judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED to the extent she seeks remand of the Commissioner’s decision; 2. Defendant’s request to affirm the Commissioner’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 matter is DISMISSED with prejudice The Clerk is directed to forward a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to counsel of record. IT IS SO ORDERED this 28th of April, 2022. ENTER: 2 David A. Faber Senior United States District Judge
]]>
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.
