Laplante v. Social Security Administration Commissioner

Filing 10

ORDER ADOPTING 9 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS in its entirety and REVERSING the decision of the Commissioner and REMANDING THIS CASE to the Commissioner for further consideration pursuant to sentence four of 42 USC 405(g). Signed by Honorable Robert T. Dawson on March 14, 2011. ***Civil Case Terminated. (mfr)

Download PDF
Laplante v. Social Security Administration Commissioner Doc. 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HOT SPRINGS DIVISION VINCENT PAUL LAPLANTE vs. Civil No. 6:09-cv-06117 DEFENDANT PLAINTIFF MICHAEL J. ASTRUE Commissioner, Social Security Administration JUDGMENT Now on this 14th day of March 2011, comes for consideration the Report and Recommendation dated February 17, 2011 by the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. ECF No. 9. Fourteen (14) days have passed without objections being filed by the parties. The Court has reviewed this case, and being well and sufficiently advised, finds that the Report and Recommendation is proper and should be adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, the Court hereby adopts the Report and Recommendation, reverses the decision of the Commissioner, and remands this case to the Commissioner for further consideration pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g) (2010). 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, 113 S.Ct. 2625 (1993); 28 U.S.C. 2412(d)(1)(B),(d)(2)(G). IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Robert T. Dawson HON. ROBERT T. DAWSON 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?