MEHALIK v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

Filing 18

MEMORANDUM ORDER. Defendant's Objections (Doc. 15 ) are OVERRULED; Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 12 ) is DENIED; Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 10 ) is GRANTED, to the extent described in the Report; t his case is REMANDED FORTHWITH for further administrative proceedings, consistent with the Magistrate Judge's instructions; and the Magistrate Judge's R&R (Doc. 14 ) is adopted as the Opinion of the District Court. Signed by Judge Cathy Bissoon on 5/15/14. (dcd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JOHN P. MEHALIK, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 13-485
Judge Cathy Bissoon
Magistrate Judge Cynthia Reed Eddy

MEMORANDUM ORDER
This case has been referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cynthia Reed Eddy for
pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(l)(A) and (B),
and Rules 72.C and 72.D of the Local Rules for Magistrates.
On March 20, 2014, the magistrate judge issued a Report (Doc. 14) recommending that
Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 12) be denied, and that Plaintiff’s Motion for
Summary Judgment (Doc. 10) be granted to the extent he requests a remand for further
administrative proceedings. Service of the Report and Recommendation was made on the
parties, and Defendant timely has filed Objections. See Doc. 15.
After a de novo review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the
Report and Recommendation and the Objections thereto, the following Order is entered:
Defendant’s Objections are OVERRULED1; Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment
(Doc. 12) is DENIED; Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 10) is GRANTED,

The Court rejects Defendant’s argument that the Report is inconsistent with the decision in
Chandler v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 667 F.3d 356, 362 (3d Cir. 2011). See Def.’s Objs. at 4
(suggesting that Magistrate Judge would require expert opinion evidence in support of each RFC
1

to the extent described in the Report; this case is REMANDED FORTHWITH for further
administrative proceedings, consistent with the Magistrate Judge’s instructions; and the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation dated March 20, 2014 is adopted as the Opinion
of the District Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

May 15, 2014

s\Cathy Bissoon
Cathy Bissoon
United States District Judge

cc (via ECF email notification):
All counsel of record

finding). To the contrary, the Magistrate Judge merely determined that the ALJ had failed to
adequately explain and support his decision to reject certain RFC findings of Dr. Mari-Mayans.
See R&R at 12-13.
2