MORALES v. COLVIN

Filing 15

ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [#13] IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR REVIEW [#S 9,10] IS GRANTED TO THE EXTENT THAT THE PLAINTIFF REQUESTS A REMAND. THE FINAL DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER IS REVERSED, AND THE MATTER IS REMANDED TO THE COMMISSIONER, PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 USC:405(G), FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT WITH THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE RUETER AND WITH THIS ORDER; AND THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL MARK THIS CASE CLOSED FOR ALL PURPOSES, INCLUDING STATISTICS. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GENE E.K. PRATTER ON 11/23/15. 11/24/15 ENTERED & E-MAILED.(fdc)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MARIA D. MORALES, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. : : : : : : : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-2791 ORDER AND NOW, this 23rd day of November, 2015, upon independent consideration of Plaintiff’s Brief and Statement of Issues in Support of Request for Review (Doc. No. 9, 10), Defendant’s Response (Doc. No. 12), and the administrative record, and upon review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas J. Rueter (Doc. No. 13), to which no objections were filed by either party, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 13) is APPROVED and ADOPTED; 2. Plaintiff’s Request for Review (Doc. No. 9, 10) is GRANTED to the extent that the Plaintiff requests a remand; 3. The final decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED, and the matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Rueter and with this Order; and 4. The Clerk of the Court shall mark this case CLOSED for all purposes, including statistics. BY THE COURT: S/Gene E.K. Pratter GENE E.K. PRATTER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?