EDDY v. COLVIN

Filing 19

ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE HON. DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE, [#17] IS ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY. THE ABOVE CAPTIONED MATTER IS REMANDED TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION FOR PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT WITH THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. SIGNED BY HONORABLE C. DARNELL JONES, II ON 4/13/15. 4/15/15 ENTERED & E-MAILED.(fdc)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
DARIAN LEE EDDY,
Plaintiff
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN and
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
Defendants

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION NO.:
2:13-CV-5370-CDJ

ORDER

AND NOW, this 13th day of April, 2015, it is hereby ORDERED that the Report and

Recommendation of the Honorable David R. Strawbridge, United States Magistrate Judge,

(Doc. No. 17), is ADOPTED in its entirety. 1 The above-captioned matter is REMANDED to

the Social Security Administration for proceedings consistent with the Report and
Recommendation.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ C. Darnell Jones, II J.
C. DARNELL JONES, II J.
1 When a party files timely objections to the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge, the district
court must review de novo those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made. 28
U.S.C. §636(b)(1). If there are no objections to the report and recommendation or when reviewing those
portions of the report and recommendation to which no objections are directed, the court should, as a matter
of good practice, “satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the
recommendation.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see also Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874,
878 (3d Cir. 1987). No objections have been filed to the Report and Recommendation, but the Court has
nonetheless reviewed it for clear error.