Anthony v. Astrue

Filing 18

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge and reverses the final decision of the Commissioner and remands the case for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation (see attachment for Report and Recommendations). Signed by Honorable Joe Heaton on 05/18/2011. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Report and Recommendations 17 )(lam)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA KRISTA L. ANTHONY, Plaintiff, vs. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NO. CIV-10-0443-HE ORDER Plaintiff Krista L. Anthony filed this suit seeking judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying her application for supplemental security income payments. Consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Bana Roberts, who recommends that the Commissioner’s decision be reversed and the matter remanded for further proceedings. The magistrate judge found the Administrative Law Judge “failed to adequately link his credibility findings to substantial evidence of record and otherwise failed to adequately articulate those findings for meaningful review.” Report & Recommendation [Doc. #17, p. 7]. The parties, having failed to object to the Report and Recommendation, waived their right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues it addressed. United States v. One Parcel of Real Property, 73 F.3d 1057, 1059-60 (10th Cir. 1996). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Accordingly, the court adopts Magistrate Judge Roberts’ Report and Recommendation, REVERSES the final decision of the Commissioner and REMANDS the case for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation, a copy of which is attached to this order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 18th day of May, 2011. 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?