Russell v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISON
Sheree Russell, ) CASE NO. 1:25 CV 640
)
Plaintiff, ) JUDGE PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN
)
vs. )
)
Commissioner of Social Security, )
) Memorandum of Opinion and Order
)
Defendant. )
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of Magistrate
Judge James E. Grimes Jr. (Doc. 13), recommending that the Court reverse the Commissioner’s
decision and remand for further proceedings. No objections have been filed. For the reasons that
follow, the R&R is ACCEPTED, and the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and
REMANDED.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
When objections are made to a Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, the district
court reviews the case de novo. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(3) provides that: “The district
judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly
objected to.” As stated in the Advisory Committee Notes, “When no timely objection is filed, the
court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the
recommendation.” In Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985), the Court held that “[i]t does not
Case: 1:25-cv-00640-PAG Doc #: 14 Filed: 01/05/26 1 of 2. PageID #: <pageID>

2
appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate judge’s factual or legal
conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings.”
DECISION
This Court, having reviewed the R&R and finding no clear error, hereby ACCEPTS the
Magistrate Judge’s R&R. In accordance with that recommendation, the decision of the Commissioner
is REVERSED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN
United States District Judge
Case: 1:25-cv-00640-PAG Doc #: 14 Filed: 01/05/26 2 of 2. PageID #: <pageID>