PLANK v. ASTRUE

Filing 15

ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR REVIEW IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; THE MATTER IS REMANDED TO THE COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE PAUL S. DIAMOND ON 12/5/13. 12/6/13 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED, ETC.(ti, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ____________________________________ PAMELA DAWN PLANK Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant. ____________________________________ : : : : : : : : : : Civ. No. 12-4144 ORDER AND NOW, this 6th day of December, 2013, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of Chief Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells (Doc. No. 14) , to which no objections have been filed, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED; 2. Plaintiff’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 to allow the Administrative Law Judge to conduct additional proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation. On remand, the ALJ shall: a. re-assess Dr. Carey’s July 28, 2009 opinion to determine whether Plaintiff meets Listing 12.05(C); b. consider Dr. Rudnick’s opinion regarding Plaintiff’s functional limitations; c. re-assess Plaintiff’s credibility; d. reconsider Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity; and e. pose hypothetical questions to the vocational expert which take into account all of Plaintiff’s credible limitations, including her borderline intellectual functioning, memory impairment, limitations in social functioning, concentration, persistence, or pace, hand numbness, pain, and propensity to drop objects. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Paul S. Diamond ___________________ Paul S. Diamond, 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?