Edwards v. Astrue
ORDER finding as moot 15 notice to the court of incomplete record as further set out; Signed by Magistrate Judge William E. Cassady on 10/28/10. (mjn)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION MARTHA PARKER o/b/o CHAMYIA EDWARDS, Plaintiff, : vs. : MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ORDER On September 15, 2010, plaintiff filed a notice of incomplete record (Doc. 15). The defendant filed his response on October 1, 2010 (Doc. 19) followed by the filing of a supplemental transcript on October 4, 2010 (Doc. 20). Because the record is now complete (see id.), plaintiff's notice to the Court (Doc. 15) is deemed MOOT. Nevertheless, the undersigned recognizes that plaintiff may make the substantive argument at the hearing on December 14, 2010 (see Doc. 13), in favor of remand, that the ALJ did not considered the records referenced in the September 15, 2010 notice (see Doc. 15, at 2 ("[I]t is respectfully requested Plaintiff's missing records be made part of the Court Record, and that an inquiry be made as to whether the missing records were viewed and considered by the Administrative Law Judge."); compare id. with Doc. 19, at 1 ("As the ALJ acknowledged receipt of the evidence at the hearing and admitted the evidence into the record , the ALJ stated that she considered all of the evidence , and the Appeals Council issued a certified supplemental administrative record, Defendant has a reasonable belief that the ALJ considered the evidence included in the supplemental : CA 10-0159-C : :
transcript.")). DONE and ORDERED this the 28th day of October, 2010. s/WILLIAM E. CASSADY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?