Case Name in Social Security Case - Unavailable

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
JOHN LAMASTER,
Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL
SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Case No. 6:25-cv-308-JDK-KNM
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff John Lamaster filed this appeal from a final administrative decision
of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying his application
for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. 	The case was
referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell for findings of fact,
conclusions of law, and recommendations for disposition. 	Before the Court is the
Commissioner’s motion to reverse and remand. 	Docket No. 14. 	On February 27,
2026, Judge Mitchell issued a Report recommending that the Court grant the motion.
Docket No. 15. 	The Report recommends that the Court reverse the Commissioner’s
final administrative decision and remand this matter to the Commissioner for further
administrative proceedings. No written objections have been filed.
This Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de
novo only if a party objects within fourteen days of service of the Report and
Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In conducting a de novo review, the Court
examines the entire record and makes an independent assessment under the law.
Case 6:25-cv-00308-JDK-KNM Document 16 Filed 03/16/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc),
superseded on other grounds by statute, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to
file objections from ten to fourteen days).
The parties did not object in the prescribed period. 	The Court therefore
reviews the Magistrate Judge’s findings for clear error or abuse of discretion and
reviews the legal conclusions to determine whether they are contrary to law. 	See
United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 492 U.S.
916 (1989) (holding that the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of
discretion and contrary to law” if no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are
filed).
Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and the record in this case,
the Court finds no clear error or abuse of discretion and no conclusions contrary to
law. Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the
United States Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 15) as the findings of this Court. 	The
motion to reverse and remand (Docket No. 14) is GRANTED. 	The Commissioner’s
final administrative decision is REVERSED and the matter is REMANDED to the
Commissioner for further administrative proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence
of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
So ORDERED and SIGNED this day of
___________________________________
JEREMY D. KERNODLE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
16th	March, 2026.
Case 6:25-cv-00308-JDK-KNM Document 16 Filed 03/16/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>