Rees v. Social Security Administration
Filing
28
ORDER by District Judge Judith C. Herrera adopting 27 Report and Recommendations, granting 19 Motion to Remand to Agency and REMANDING this case to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings. (baw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
SANDRA LOUISA REES,
Plaintiff,
v.
CIV No. 15‐519 JCH/GBW
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,1 Acting
Commissioner of the Social Security
Administration,
Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S PROPOSED FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION
On June 18, 2015, Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendant seeking review of
the Social Security Administration’s decision to deny Plaintiff benefits. Doc. 1. On
March 21, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Remand to Agency. Doc. 19. That motion
was fully briefed by July 5, 2016. See docs. 23, 25, 26. On January 12, 2017, the
Magistrate Judge filed his Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition (PFRD),
in which he recommended granting Plaintiff’s Motion and remanding this action to the
Social Security Administration for further proceedings. Doc. 27. Neither party has filed
Nancy A. Berryhill is now the Acting Commissioner of Social Security. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Nancy A. Berryhill is hereby substituted for Acting Commissioner
Carolyn W. Colvin as Defendant in this action. This action is not otherwise affected by the change. See 42
U.S.C. § 405(g).
1
objections to the PFRD, and, upon review of the record, I concur with the Magistrate
Judge’s findings and recommendations.
Wherefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Proposed
Findings and Recommended Disposition (doc. 27), is ADOPTED. Plaintiff’s motion is
GRANTED and this case REMANDED to the Social Security Administration for further
proceedings.
JUDITH C. HERRERA
United States District Judge
2
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?