Hirtzinger v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 15

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that 14 the Parties' Joint MOTION to Remand be GRANTED; the Clerk of Court be directed to enter Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant reversing Defendant's final decision and remanding this matter to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings; and the case be terminated on the docket of this Court. Objections to R&R due by 8/25/2014. Signed by Chief Magistrate Judge Sharon L Ovington on 8-7-14. (mm1)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
JODI K. HIRTZINGER,
Plaintiff,

:
:

Case No. 3:13cv00351

vs.

:

District Judge Walter Herbert Rice
Chief Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of the Social
Security Administration,

:

Defendant.

:
:

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS1

This case is before the Court upon the parties’ Joint Motion For Remand. (Doc.
#14). In light of the parties’ agreement, the Court finds that an Order entering judgment
in Plaintiff’s favor and against Defendant, and remanding this matter to the Social
Security Administration under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. §405(g) for further
administrative proceedings, is warranted.
On remand, the Appeals Council will remand the matter to an administrative law
judge for a new hearing and a new decision to: (1) evaluate and discuss the opinions of
the State agency psychological consultants; (2) reevaluate the opinion of Shelley Lopez,

1

Attached hereto is a NOTICE to the parties regarding objections to this Report and
Recommendations.

M.S.; (3) further assess Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity if necessary; (4) consider
all of Plaintiff’s impairments in determining what severe impairments Plaintiff may have
and in determining Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity; and (5) if warranted under the
expanded record, obtain supplemental evidence from a vocational expert to clarify the
effects of the assessed limitations on the occupational base.

IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT:
1.

The parties’ Joint Motion For Remand (Doc. #14) be GRANTED;

2.

The Clerk of Court be directed to enter Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and
against Defendant reversing Defendant’s final decision and remanding this
matter to the Social Security Administration pursuant to sentence four of 42
U.S.C. §405(g) for further proceedings consistent with an Order adopting
this Report and Recommendations; and

3.

The case be terminated on the docket of this Court.

August 7, 2014
s/Sharon L. Ovington
Sharon L. Ovington
Chief United States Magistrate Judge

2

NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written
objections to the proposed findings and recommendations within FOURTEEN days after
being served with this Report and Recommendations. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d),
this period is extended to SEVENTEEN days because this Report is being served by one
of the methods of service listed in Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(C), (D), (E), or (F). Such
objections shall specify the portions of the Report objected to and shall be accompanied
by a memorandum of law in support of the objections. If the Report and Recommendation
is based in whole or in part upon matters occurring of record at an oral hearing, the
objecting party shall promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or such portions
of it as all parties may agree upon or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the
assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond to another party’s
objections within FOURTEEN days after being served with a copy thereof.
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,
949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).

3