Marshall v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
18
DECISION AND ENTRY - The Report and Recommendations filed on June 4, 2015 17 is ADOPTED in full, no finding is made as to whether Plaintiff Melissa Marshall was under a disability within the meaning of the Social Security Act, this case is remanded to the Commissioner and the Administrative Law Judge under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. §405(g) for further consideration consistent with the Report and Recommendations and the instant Decision and Entry, and this case is terminated on the docket of this Court. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 6-24-2015. (de)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
MELISSA MARSHALL,
:
Plaintiff,
:
Case No. 3:14cv00144
vs.
:
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of the Social
Security Administration,
Defendant.
:
District Judge Thomas M. Rose
Chief Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington
:
:
DECISION AND ENTRY
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendations of Chief United States
Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington (Doc. #17), to whom this case was originally
referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed
thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has
expired, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommendations.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1.
The Report and Recommendations filed on June 4, 2015 (Doc. #17) is
ADOPTED in full;
2.
No finding is made as to whether Plaintiff Melissa Marshall was under a
“disability” within the meaning of the Social Security Act;
3.
This case is remanded to the Commissioner and the Administrative Law
Judge under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. §405(g) for further consideration
consistent with the Report and Recommendations and the instant Decision
and Entry; and
4.
The case is terminated on the docket of this Court.
June 24, 2015
*/Thomas M. Rose
_______________________
Thomas M. Rose
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?