Cooper v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 14

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THAT: (1) THE JOINT, UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR REMAND (DOC. 13) BE GRANTED; AND (2) THIS CASE BE TERMINATED ON THE COURTS DOCKET1 re 2 Complaint filed by Robert Cooper, 13 Joint MOTION to Remand filed by Commissioner of Social Security. Objections to R&R due by 2/23/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J Newman on 02/05/15. (pb1)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
ROBERT COOPER,
Case No.: 3:14-cv-113
Plaintiff,
vs.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

District Judge Walter H. Rice
Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman

Defendant.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THAT: (1) THE JOINT, UNOPPOSED MOTION
FOR REMAND (DOC. 13) BE GRANTED; AND (2) THIS CASE BE TERMINATED ON
THE COURT’S DOCKET1
This case is before the Court on the parties’ joint, unopposed motion requesting a remand for
further administrative proceedings pursuant to the Fourth Sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and the
entry of judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Doc. 13. The parties request that, upon remand,
the Appeals Council vacate the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ’s”) non-disability decision, and
the Commissioner conduct further proceedings and develop the administrative record as necessary to
determine whether Plaintiff is disabled under the Social Security Act.
For good cause shown, and because the requirements of a Sentence Four Remand have been
satisfied, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT:
1.

The ALJ’s non-disability finding be found unsupported by substantial evidence, and
the parties’ joint, unopposed motion for a Sentence Four remand be GRANTED;

2.

This case be REMANDED for further administrative proceedings as discussed
above; and

3.

This case be TERMINATED upon the Court’s docket.

Date: February 5, 2015

1

s/ Michael J. Newman
Michael J. Newman
United States Magistrate Judge

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

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 Recommendation. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), this period is
extended to SEVENTEEN days because this Report and Recommendation is being served by
one of the methods of service listed in Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(C), (D), (E), or (F), and may be
extended further by the Court on timely motion for an extension. Such objections shall specify
the portions of the Report and Recommendation 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.

As is made clear above, this period is likewise extended to

SEVENTEEN days if service of the objections is made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(C),
(D), (E), or (F). Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights
on appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 153-55 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d
947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).

-2-