ZINGELEWICZ v. ASTRUE

Filing 14

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 8 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 11 Motion for Summary Judgment; remanding for further proceedings; adopting Report and Recommendations re 13 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge Donetta W. Ambrose on 1/29/14. (slh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JEFFREY VINCENT ZINGELEWICZ,
v.

Plaintiff,

MICHAEL J. ASRUE,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C.A. No. 12-286 Erie

AMBROSE, Senior District Judge
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiff's complaint was received by the Clerk of Court on November 15, 2012, and was
referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter

for report and

recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1), and Rules
72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates.
The magistrate judge's report and recommendation, filed on January 6, 2013,
recommended that the Commissioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 11) be denied,
that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 8) be denied to the extent that he
requests an award of benefits but granted to the extent he seeks a vacatur of the
Commissioner’s decision, and a remand for further proceedings. It is further recommended that
the Commissioner’s decision be vacated, and that the case be remanded for further
consideration of Plaintiff’s application for benefits. The Commissioner should be directed to
“reopen and fully develop the record before rendering a ruling” on Plaintiff’s claim.

Thomas v.

Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 625 F.3d 798, 800 (3d Cir. 2010). The parties were allowed ten (10) days
from the date of service to file objections.
NEF.

No objections were filed.

Service was made on Plaintiff and Defendant by

After de novo review of the pleadings and documents in the

case, together with the report and recommendation, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 29th day of January, 2014, it is ordered that that the Commissioner’s
Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 11) is DENIED. The Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary
Judgment (ECF No. 8) is DENIED to the extent that he requests an award of benefits but
GRANTED to the extent he seeks a vacatur of the Commissioner’s decision, and a remand for
further proceedings. It is further ORDERED that the Commissioner’s decision is vacated, and
that the case is remanded for further consideration of Plaintiff’s application for benefits. The
Commissioner is directed to “reopen and fully develop the record before rendering a ruling” on
Plaintiff’s claim. Thomas v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 625 F.3d 798, 800 (3d Cir. 2010).
The report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter, dated January 6, 2014, is
adopted as the opinion of the court.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Donetta W. Ambrose
Donetta W. Ambrose
United States Senior District Judge