Newcomb v. Social Security Administration Commissioner

Filing 12

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Honorable Barry A. Bryant on November 10, 2010. (tg)

Download PDF
Newcomb v. Social Security Administration Commissioner Doc. 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HOT SPRINGS DIVISION AMY L. NEWCOMB vs. Civil No. 6:10-cv-06048 DEFENDANT PLAINTIFF MICHAEL J. ASTRUE Commissioner, Social Security Administration MEMORANDUM OPINION Before this Court is Defendant's Motion to Remand. ECF No. 11. The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge to conduct any and all proceedings in this case, including conducting the trial, ordering the entry of a final judgment, and conducting all post-judgment proceedings. ECF No. 5. Pursuant to this authority, this Court issues this Order. On October 21, 2010, Defendant filed the present Motion. ECF No. 11. Defendant requests a remand so that the ALJ may conduct further administrative proceedings. Id. Specifically, Defendant represents that the ALJ will do the following: The ALJ will hold a new hearing and will obtain additional evidence from a consultative examination specifically to clarify, based upon an examination and a review of Plaintiff's medical records and/or history, what limitations, if any, Plaintiff experiences with respect to her ability to perform the mental requirements of work-related activity and to establish a well-supported mental RFC finding. The ALJ will also provide a detailed rationale for his determination of all of his RFC finding in his new decision. Id. This Court has contacted Plaintiff, and Plaintiff does not object to this Motion. Accordingly, Defendant's Motion to Remand (ECF No. 11) is GRANTED. A judgment incorporating these findings will be entered pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 52 and 58. ENTERED this 10th day of November, 2010. s/ Barry A. Bryant HON. BARRY A. BRYANT U. S. 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?