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)
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?