Clarke v. Social Security, Commissioner of

Filing 20

OPINION and ORDER (1) Adopting Magistrate Judge's 18 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; (2) Granting Plaintiff's 11 MOTION for Summary Judgment; (3) Denying Defendant's 15 MOTION for Summary Judgment; (4) Vacating Commissioner's Decision; and (5) Remanding for Re-Hearing. Signed by District Judge Linda V. Parker. (Loury, R)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
KIMBERLY ANN CLARKE,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Case No. 13-11534
Honorable Linda V. Parker

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
/

OPINION AND ORDER (1) ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S JULY
30, 2014 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION;
(2) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT;
(3) DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT;
(4) VACATING COMMISSIONER’S DECISION; AND
(5) REMANDING FOR RE-HEARING
On April 4, 2013, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit challenging a final decision of
the Social Security Commissioner denying Plaintiff’s application for Disability
Insurance Benefits under the Social Security Act. On the same date, the matter
was referred to Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris for all pretrial proceedings,
including a hearing and determination of all non-dispositive matters pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and/or a report and recommendation (“R&R”) on all
dispositive matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). (ECF No. 2.) The
parties subsequently filed cross-motions for summary judgment. (ECF Nos. 11,

15.)
Magistrate Judge Morris issued her R&R on July 30, 2014, recommending
that this Court grant Plaintiff’s motion, deny Defendant’s motion, vacate the
Commissioner’s decision, and remand the matter for re-hearing pursuant to
sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (ECF No. 18.) Magistrate Judge Morris
recommends a remand in this matter because a transcript of the hearing before the
Administrative Law Judge on November 24, 2009 is not part of the record, as it
was lost during the administrative process. Magistrate Judge Morris finds that
Plaintiff’s testimony at the hearing with respect to her daily activities or
capabilities are critical to evaluating the ALJ’s decision with respect to whether
Plaintiff’s disabilities met or equaled a listed impairment. (Id. at 16-17.) The
magistrate judge therefore recommends that this Court vacate the Commissioner’s
decision and remand for a new hearing. (Id. at 18.)
At the conclusion of the R&R, Magistrate Judge Morris advises the parties
that they may object to and seek review of the R&R within fourteen days of service
upon them. (Id. at 18-19.) She further specifically advises the parties that
“[f]ailure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right to
appeal.” (Id.) No objections to the R&R were filed.
The Court has carefully reviewed the R&R and concurs with the conclusions
2

reached by Magistrate Judge Morris. The Court therefore adopts Magistrate Judge
Morris’ July 30, 2014 Report and Recommendation.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED, that Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No.
11) is GRANTED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that Defendant’s motion for summary
judgment (ECF No. 15) is DENIED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the decision of the Commissioner is
reversed and this matter is remanded to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence
four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)
S/ Linda V. Parker
LINDA V. PARKER
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: September 15, 2014
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of
record and/or pro se parties on this date, September 15, 2014, by electronic and/or
U.S. First Class mail.
S/ Richard Loury
Case Manager

3