Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jackson v. Commissioner of Social Security

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

July 13, 2015

DAWN MAY JACKSON, Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

JOHN I. TSIROS, ESQ. DERRI T. THOMAS, ESQ. LUCY A. BEZDEK, ESQ.

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION OR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, and REMANDING FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)

PATRICK J. DUGGAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On August 26, 2014, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit challenging the final decision of the Commissioner denying her application for supplemental security income. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment, which were referred to Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen.

On June 19, 2015, Magistrate Judge Whalen issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) recommending that the Court (1) grant Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment to the extent it seeks remand, (2) deny Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, and (3) remand the case for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). At the conclusion of the R&R, Magistrate Judge Whalen advised the parties that they may object and seek review of the R&R within fourteen days. R&R at 19 (ECF No. 17). He further specifically advised the parties that “[f]ailure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right of appeal.” Id. Neither party has filed objections to the R&R, and the time to do so has expired.

The Court has carefully reviewed the R&R and concurs with the conclusions reached by the Magistrate Judge. The Court therefore adopts the Magistrate Judge’s R&R. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED to the extent it seeks a remand;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the matter is remanded for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.