Sparks v. Social Security Administration Commissioner

Filing 17

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 16 MOTION to Remand filed by Social Security Administration Commissioner. Objections to R&R due by 1/18/2017. Signed by Honorable Barry A. Bryant on January 4, 2017. (hnc)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION DAVID R. SPARKS vs. PLAINTIFF Civil No. 2:16-cv-02155 CAROLYN W. COLVIN Commissioner, Social Security Administration DEFENDANT REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Before this Court is Defendant’s Motion to Remand. ECF No. 16. Plaintiff does not oppose this Motion. Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and (3) (2005), the Honorable P. K. Holmes, III referred this case to this Court for the purpose of making a report and recommendation. In accordance with that referral, this Court enters the following report and recommendation. Defendant requests Plaintiff’s case be remanded. ECF No. 16. Defendant requests this remand so the ALJ may conduct further administrative proceedings and to obtain a complete record. Id. Based upon the foregoing, this Court recommends Defendant’s Motion to Remand (ECF No. 16) be GRANTED and Plaintiff’s case be remanded, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to the Social Security Administration for further administrative review. The parties have fourteen (14) days from receipt of this Report and Recommendation in which to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. The parties are 1 reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the district court. See Thompson v. Nix, 897 F.2d 356, 357 (8th Cir. 1990). ENTERED this 4th day of January, 2017. /s/ Barry A. Bryant HON. BARRY A. BRYANT U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

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?