Gieseke v. Colvin, No. 2:2014cv29994 - Document 23 (S.D.W. Va. 2015)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting the 22 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION, granting Defendant's 21 MOTION to Remand Case to Commissioner of Social Security Administration, remanding this case for further proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 41 U.S.S. § 405(g), and directing the Clerk to remove this case from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 10/28/2015. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (tmh)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION JENNIFER LACE GIESEKE, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO.: 2:14-cv-29994 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. 21.) By Standing Order entered on May 7, 2014 and filed in this case on December 16, 2014, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for submission of proposed findings of fact and recommendations for disposition. (ECF No. 2.) Magistrate Judge Tinsley filed his proposed findings of fact and recommendations for disposition on October 9, 2015 (the “PF&R”), in which he recommends that the Court grant Defendant’s Motion for Remand, remand this case, enter final judgment, and dismiss this matter. (ECF No. 22.) 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 were due by October 26, 2015. (See ECF No. 22 at 2.) To date, the parties have not filed any objections. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R, (ECF No. 22), GRANTS Defendant’s Motion for Remand, (ECF No. 21), 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 case 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: October 28, 2015

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.