MITCHELL v. ASTRUE
ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION DATED JANUARY, 28, 2011, IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; THE CLAIMANT'S REQUEST FOR REVIEW IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; THE MATTER IS REMANDED TO THE COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE MEDICAL EVEDENCE SOLELY REGARDING THE DIAGNOSIS OF REFLEX SYMPATHETIC DYSTROPHY ON PLAINTIFF'S LEFT ARM, INCLUDING THE TAKING OF EVIDENCE FROM A MEDICAL EXPERT IF NECESSARY. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE CLERK OF THE COURT SHALL MARK THE ABOVE-CAPTIONED CASE AS CLOSED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE PETRESE B. TUCKER ON 2/24/11. 2/25/11 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(mas, )
MITCHELL v. ASTRUE
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA LORI E. MITCHELL, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER Defendant. ORDER AND NOW, this ____ day of February, 2011, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Request for Review (Doc. 12), Defendant's Response thereto (Doc. 14), and after careful review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Jacob P. Hart (Doc. 16) and no objections having been filed, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED and DECREED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation dated January, 28, 2011, is APPROVED and ADOPTED; 2. The Claimant's Request for Review is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. 3. The matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration for consideration of the medical evidence solely regarding the diagnosis of Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy in Plaintiff's left arm, including the taking of evidence from a medical expert if necessary. : : : : : : : : : : :
CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-2185
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall mark the above-captioned case as CLOSED.
BY THE COURT: /s/ Petrese B. Tucker ____________________________ Hon. Petrese B. Tucker, U.S.D.J.
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?