Wright v Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 36

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 35 Report and Recommendations, The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED IN PART and REMANDED IN PART to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C.§ 405(g) for further proceedings in accordance with Magistrate Judge Rodovichs Report and Recommendation. ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Theresa L Springmann on 4/19/11. (mlc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
JOHN WRIGHT,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CAUSE NO.: 4:10-CV-35-TLS

ORDER
Plaintiff John Wright has appealed the final decision of the Commissioner of Social
Security denying his application for disability insurance benefits. On January 11, 2011, the Court
referred this matter to Magistrate Judge Andrew P. Rodovich for a report and recommendation.
On March 31, 2011, Magistrate Judge Rodovich filed his Report and Recommendation
[ECF No. 35], recommending that the Commissioner’s final decision, which is predicated on the
Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) determination, be affirmed in part and reversed in part and
that the case be remanded for further proceedings. Judge Rodovich recommends the Court affirm
the Commissioner’s decision with respect to the ALJ’s development of illiteracy in the record
and remand this case to the Commissioner to determine whether the Plaintiff meets Listing 12.05
(mental retardation) and whether there was a period of time during which the Plaintiff ceased his
substance abuse.
This Court’s review of Judge Rodovich’s Report and Recommendation is governed by 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), which provides in part:
A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the
report or specified proposed findings and recommendations to which objection is
made. A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the
findings and recommendations made by the magistrate. The judge may also

receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate with
instructions.
The statute requires objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to be
made within fourteen days of service of a copy of the report. Id.; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)
(setting forth procedures for objecting to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and
the district court’s resolution of any objections). The Commissioner has not objected to the
Report and Recommendation, and the time for making objections has now passed.
Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation prepared by Judge Rodovich, the
Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 35] in its entirety and ACCEPTS the
recommended disposition. Accordingly, the decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED IN
PART and REMANDED IN PART to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C.
§ 405(g) for further proceedings in accordance with Magistrate Judge Rodovich’s Report and
Recommendation.
SO ORDERED on April 19, 2011.
s/ Theresa L. Springmann
THERESA L. SPRINGMANN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FORT WAYNE DIVISION

2