Tuttle v. Colvin
OPINION AND ORDER Adopting 32 Report and Recommendation Denying 28 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Carolyn W. Colvin, Granting 24 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Birgit E. Tuttle in that it seeks a Remand, and Remanding for Further Proceedings under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g). Signed by District Judge Paul D. Borman. (DTof)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
BIRGIT E. TUTTLE,
Case No. 16-cv-11144
Paul D. Borman
United States District Judge
R. Steven Whalen
United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER (1) ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S JUNE 9, 2017 REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION (ECF NO. 32), (2) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO THE EXTENT IT SEEKS A REMAND (ECF NO. 24),
(3) DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NO. 28), AND
(4) REMANDING FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
UNDER SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)
On June 9, 2017, Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen issued a Report and
Recommendation to GRANT Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment to the extent it seeks
a remand, DENY Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, and REMAND this matter
for further administrative proceedings. Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation,
and there being no timely objections under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and E.D. Mich L. R.
72.1(d), the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 32), GRANTS
Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment to the extent it seeks a remand (ECF No. 24),
DENIES Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 28), and REMANDS the
matter for further proceedings under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), consistent with
Magistrate Judge Whalen’s analysis in his June 9, 2017 Report and Recommendation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Paul D. Borman
PAUL D. BORMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: July 7, 2017
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney
or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on July 7, 2017.
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?