Wynn v. Social Security Administration

Filing 23

OPINION AND ORDER by Judge Claire V Eagan ; remanding case (terminates case) ; accepting 21 Report and Recommendation (Re: 2 Social Security Complaint ) (RGG, Chambers)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

KELLY LEE WYNN,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COVLIN,
Acting Commissioner, Social
Security Administration

Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 14-CV-0436-CVE-TLW

OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes on for consideration of the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. # 21) of
Magistrate Judge T. Lane Wilson recommending that the Commissioner’s decision to deny
plaintiff’s claims for disability benefits be reversed and remanded in part and that the Court enter
a finding of no reversible error in part. The magistrate judge recommended that the case be reversed
and remanded for further consideration of medical source evidence regarding plaintiff’s mental
impairments and that the Court enter a finding of no reversible error regarding the ALJ’s residual
functional capacity (RFC) findings related to plaintiff’s physical limitations.
Plaintiff has not objected to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and the time
to do so has expired. Defendant filed a Notice of No Objection to the Report and Recommendation
of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. # 22) stating that defendant would not file an objection to the report
and recommendation, but would instead rest upon its response brief, which the magistrate judge duly
considered before he issued the report and recommendation.

Upon de novo review and

consideration of defendant’s arguments in its response brief, the Court concludes the magistrate
judge’s report and recommendation should be accepted.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. # 21) is
accepted. The Commissioner’s decision to deny plaintiff’s claim for disability benefits is reversed
and remanded for further consideration of medical source evidence regarding plaintiff’s mental
impairments. A finding of no reversible error is entered as to the ALJ’s findings regarding his
formulation of plaintiff’s RFC as it relates to his physical limitations. A separate judgment is
entered herewith.
DATED this 2nd day of November, 2015.

2