Kennedy v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
24
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 23 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge James L Graham on 2/25/2015. (ds)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
William Kennedy,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 2:14-cv-977
Carolyn W. Colvin,
Acting Commissioner of
Social Security,
Defendant.
ORDER
This matter is before the court for consideration of the
February 4, 2015, 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 opinions of Dr.
Powers.
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. 23).
The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying
plaintiff’s applications for a period of disability and disability
insurance benefits 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
further consider the opinions of Dr. Powers. The clerk is directed
to enter a final judgment in this case.
Date: February 25, 2015
s/James L. Graham
James L. Graham
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?