Clonch v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
20
ORDER adopting 19 the Report and Recommendation. Signed by Judge Michael H. Watson on 9/9/15. (jk)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
Amanda J. Clonch,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 2:14-cv-2327
Commissioner of Social Security,
Judge Michael H. Watson
Defendant.
ORDER
On August 17, 2015, Magistrate Judge King, to whom this case was
referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and General Order No. 14-01, filed
a Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), ECF No. 19, concerning the disposition
of Amanda J. Clonch's ("Plaintiff") Complaint, ECF No. 2, in this Social Security
case. The R&R recommended reversing the decision of the Social Security
Administration and remanding the case to the Commissioner and the
Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") for further consideration of the evidence, as the
ALJ did not consider Plaintiff's diagnosis of obesity in light of Social Security
Ruling 02-01 p, 2002 SSR Lexis 1 (Sept. 12, 2002). R&R 8-9, ECF No. 19.
Magistrate Judge King notified the parties of their right to file objections to
the R&R pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
72(b). Id. at 11. Magistrate Judge King specifically advised the parties that the
failure to object to the R&R within fourteen days would result in a waiver of the
right to de novo review by the District Judge. Id. at 11-12. The deadline for filing
such objections has passed, and no objections were filed.
Having received no objections, the R&R, ECF No. 19, is ADOPTED. The
decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is REVERSED, and this matter
is REMANDED to the Commissioner and ALJ.
The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter FINAL JUDGMENT pursuant to
Sentence 4 of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
IICHAEL H. WATSON, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case No. 2:14-cv-2327
Page 2 of 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?