Ault v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 18

ORDER finding as moot 14 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 17 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 4 Complaint filed by David M Ault, 14 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 13 Statement of Specific Errors New date requested 11/21/2013. filed by Commissioner of Social S ; adopting Report and Recommendations re 17 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge James L Graham on 5/27/14. (ds)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
David M. Ault,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 2:13-cv-505

Carolyn W. Colvin,
Acting Commissioner of
Social Security,
Defendant.
ORDER
This matter is before the court for consideration of the May
4, 2014, report and recommendation of the United States magistrate
judge to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b).
The

magistrate

judge

recommended

that

the

decision

of

the

Commissioner be reversed and that the action be remanded to the
Commissioner for further consideration of the medical opinions of
Drs. Yerian and Hodges.
The report and recommendation specifically advised the parties
that failure to object to the report and recommendation within
fourteen days of the filing of the report “will result in a waiver
of the right to de novo review by the District Judge and waiver of
the right to appeal the judgment of the District Court[.]”
17, pp. 36-37.

Doc.

Noting that no objections have been filed and that

the time for filing such objections has expired, the court adopts
and affirms the report and recommendation (Doc. 17).
The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying
plaintiff’s applications for disability insurance benefits and
supplemental security income is reversed pursuant to Sentence 4 of
42

U.S.C.

§405(g).

This

action

is

hereby

remanded

to

the

Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with the report and
recommendation and this order.

On remand, the administrative law

judge shall consider the November 2009 opinion of Dr. Yerian
concerning plaintiff’s residual functional capacity, the opinion of
Dr. Hodges, plaintiff’s treating physician, regarding plaintiff’s
residual functional capacity, and Dr. Hodges’ treatment notes.

If

the administrative law judge does not accord Dr. Hodges’ opinion
controlling weight, then the administrative law judge shall provide
good reasons for discounting the weight given Dr. Hodges’ opinion.
The clerk is directed to enter a final judgment in this case.

Date: May 27, 2014

s/James L. Graham
James L. Graham
United States District Judge

2