HALTERMAN v. BERRYHILL

Filing 17

ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO REMAND IS GRANTED, AND THIS MATTER IS HEREBY REMANDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOURTH SENTENCE OF 42 USC:405(G) TO THE APPEALS COUNCIL OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY A DMINISTRATION FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION AND REFERRAL TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS TO FURTHER EVALUATE PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED BY SEPARATE DOCUMENT, FILED CONTEMPORANEOUSLY. THE CLERK OF COURTS SHALL MARK THIS CASE CLOSED FOR ALL PURPOSES INCLUDING STATISTICS. SIGNED BY HONORABLE C. DARNELL JONES, II ON 10/13/17. 10/13/17 ENTERED & E-MAILED.(fdc)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA DONNA MARIE HALTERMAN, Plaintiff CIVIL NO. 17-00961 v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Defendant AND NOW this ~day of FILED OCT 13 2017 OR~ER tfr~ , 2017, upon consideration of the parties' submissions, and after careful and independent review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Richard A. Lloret (Doc. No. /5 ), it is ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED; 2. Defendant's Motion to Remand is GRANTED, and this matter is hereby REMANDED in accordance with the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. ยง 405(g) to the Appeals Council of the Social Security Administration for further consideration and referral to an administrative law judge for further proceedings to further evaluate Plaintiffs claim. 3. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED by separate document, filed contemporaneously. See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 303 (1993); Kadelski v. Sullivan, 30 F.3d 399, 402 (3d Cir. 1994); Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a). 4. The Clerk of Courts shall mark this case CLOSED for all purposes including statistics. BY THE COURT: 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?