Golston v. Social Security Administration Commissioner
JUDGMENT/ORDER REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER AND REMANDING THIS CASE TO THE COMMISSIONER PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR of 42 U.S.C. 405(g) and adopting the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as set forth in the 9 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Honorable Susan O. Hickey on February 3, 2016. (mll)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
DEMETRIUS S. GOLSTON
on behalf of R.D.G., a minor
Case No. 4:15-cv-04009
CAROLYN COLVIN Commissioner,
Social Security Administration
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed January 15, 2016, by the
Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.
(ECF No. 9). Judge Bryant recommends the finding that the decision of the Administrative Law
Judge, denying benefits to Plaintiff on behalf of R.D.G. is not supported by substantial evidence and
recommends that the decision be reversed and remanded.
The parties have not filed objections to the Report and Recommendation, and the time to
object has passed. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation
in toto. Accordingly, the decision of the Commissioner is reversed, and this case is remanded to the
Commissioner for further consideration pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2006).
If Plaintiff wishes to request an award of attorney’s fees and costs under the Equal Access
to Justice Act (EAJA) 28 U.S.C. § 2412, an application may be filed up to thirty (30) days after the
judgment becomes “not appealable” i.e., thirty (30) days after the sixty (60) day time for appeal has
ended. See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296 (1993); 28 U.S.C. §§ 2412(d)(1)(B),(d)(2)(G).
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 3rd day of February, 2016.
/s/ Susan O. Hickey
Susan O. Hickey
United States District 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?