Washington v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 9

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Complaint, filed by Timothy Washington : that Commissioner's decision be REVERSED under Sentence four and REMANDED for further review, in accordance with the Joint Stipulation to Remand (Doc. 8). Objections to R&R due by 8/19/2013. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on 7/31/13. (jl1)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

TIMOTHY WASHINGTON,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:13-cv-278
Barrett, J.
Bowman, M.J.

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to local practice, this social security case has been referred to the
undersigned magistrate judge for initial review and a report and recommendation. On
July 30, 2013, the parties filed a joint stipulation to remand the case back to the
Commissioner.

Accordingly, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the Commissioner’s

decision be REVERSED under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. §405(g) and remanded to the
Commissioner for further review, in accordance with the Joint Stipulation to Remand
(Doc. 8). As no other matters remain pending, this case should be CLOSED.

s/ Stephanie K. Bowman
Stephanie K. Bowman
United States Magistrate Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

TIMOTHY WASHINGTON,

Case No. 1:13-cv-278

Plaintiff,

Barrett, J.
Bowman, M.J.

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
NOTICE
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written
objections to this Report & Recommendation (“R&R”) within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS of
the filing date of this R&R. That period may be extended further by the Court on timely
motion by either side for an extension of time. All objections shall specify the portion(s)
of the R&R objected to, and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support
of the objections. A party shall respond to an opponent’s objections within FOURTEEN
(14) DAYS after being served with a copy of those objections.

Failure to make

objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See Thomas
v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).

2