Phillips v. Astrue
Filing
21
ORDER adopting 20 Report and Recommendation.. Signed by Honorable Timothy D. DeGiusti on 4/29/2014. (mb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
MIKE PHILLIPS,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of the Social
Security Administration,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. CIV-13-61-D
ORDER
Plaintiff brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §405(g) for review of the decision of the
Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying Plaintiff’s application for
supplemental security income benefits. The matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge
Suzanne Mitchell for initial proceedings in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §636 (b)(1)(B). The parties
fully briefed their respective positions and, on March 28, 2014, the Magistrate Judge filed her Report
and Recommendation [Doc. No. 20] in which she recommended that the Court reverse the decision
of the Commissioner and remand the matter for further administrative proceedings.
In the Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge advised the parties of the right to
file objections to the same and directed the parties to file any objections no later than April 17, 2014.
The Magistrate Judge further admonished the parties that failure to timely object would constitute
a waiver of the right to appeal. The deadline for filing objections has expired and to date, neither
party has filed objections or sought an extension of time in which to do so. Accordingly, the Report
and Recommendation [Doc. No. 20] is adopted as though fully set forth herein.
In accordance with the foregoing, the decision of the Commissioner denying Plaintiff’s
application for supplemental security income benefits is REVERSED. This matter is REMANDED
to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings, as more fully set forth in the Report and
Recommendation.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 29th day of April, 2014.
2
3
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?