Loy v. Commissioner of Social Security

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISON
Shannon D. Loy, ) CASE NO. 5:24 CV 2239
)
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 Carmen E. Henderson (Doc. 15), recommending that the Court reverse the Commissioner’s
nondisability finding and remand this case with instructions to consider the unresolved vocational
issues regarding the probationary period. 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
Case: 5:24-cv-02239-PAG Doc #: 16 Filed: 11/18/25 1 of 2. PageID #: <pageID>

2
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
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 REMANDED with instructions to consider the unresolved vocational issues
regarding the probationary period.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN
United States District Judge
/s/ Patricia A. Gaughan
Dated: 11/18/25
Case: 5:24-cv-02239-PAG Doc #: 16 Filed: 11/18/25 2 of 2. PageID #: <pageID>