Dillard v. Kijakazi, No. 2:2020cv00541 - Document 15 (S.D.W. Va. 2021)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting the 14 Proposed Findings and Recommendations; directing that the Plaintiff's 11 Request to reverse the Commissioner's decision be granted; denying the 12 Request to Affirm the decision; the final decision of the Commissioner be reversed and remanded for further proceedings and removed from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 7/21/2021. (cc: Magistrate Judge Tinsley, counsel of record, any unrepresented party) (lca)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Dillard v. Kijakazi Doc. 15 Case 2:20-cv-00541 Document 15 Filed 07/21/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 1059 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION GLENNIS JENE DILLARD, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20-cv-00541 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER By Standing Order (Document 3) entered on August 13, 2020, this action was referred to the Honorable Dwane L. Tinsley, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission to this Court of proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). On June 30, 2021, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 14) wherein it is recommended that the Plaintiff’s request/motion to reverse the Commissioner’s decision (Document 11) be granted, that the Defendant’s request/motion to affirm the Commissioner’s decision (Document 12-1) be denied, that the final decision of the Commissioner be reversed, and that this matter be remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Proposed Findings and Recommendation. Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by July 14, 2021, and none were filed by either party. The Court is not required to review, under 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:20-cv-00541 Document 15 Filed 07/21/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1060 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. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985); see also Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983) (holding that districts courts may adopt proposed findings and recommendations without explanation in the absence of objections). Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the Proposed Findings and Recommendation. The Court ORDERS that the Plaintiff’s request/motion to reverse the Commissioner’s decision (Document 11) be GRANTED, that the Defendant’s request/motion to affirm the Commissioner’s decision (Document 12-1) be DENIED, that the final decision of the Commissioner be REVERSED, that this matter be REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with the Proposed Findings and Recommendation, and that this matter be REMOVED from the Court’s docket. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to Magistrate Judge Tinsley, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party. ENTER: 2 July 21, 2021
]]>
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.
