HECHINGER v. COLVIN
Filing
16
ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE JACOB P. HART 14 IS HEREBY APPROVED AND ADOPTED, ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 02/03/2017. 02/03/2017 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(nds)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MARK E. HECHINGER,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
CIVIL ACTION
No. 16-0795
O R D E R
AND NOW, this 3rd day of February, 2017, after
reviewing the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge Jacob P. Hart (ECF No. 14), it is hereby
ORDERED that:
(1)
The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and
ADOPTED;1
1
The Court notes in particular its agreement with Judge
Hart that the record is unclear as to whether the Administrative
Law Judge (“ALJ”) should have considered the letter signed by
Jessica Roscosky, a physician’s assistant, to be a doctor’s
evaluation. Although the Commissioner carefully details the ways
in which the evaluation provided by Craig Johnson, M.D. (“Dr.
Johnson”) supports the denial of disability benefits, and
although that evaluation is doubtless the opinion of a treating
physician, the evaluation very well might be undermined by later
notes and letters that seem to contradict it. This conclusion is
further supported by the fact that Dr. Johnson’s evaluation is
rather narrowly focused on the results and immediate aftermath
of Plaintiff’s surgery, whereas the later letters and notes seem
to reflect broader examinations during a more recent time
period.
(3)
Plaintiff’s request for review is GRANTED;
(4)
This matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner for
further review consistent with this Order; and
(5)
The Clerk of Court shall mark this case as
CLOSED.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Eduardo C. Robreno
EDUARDO C. ROBRENO,
J.
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?