Nolan v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of

Filing 27

ORDER granting 13 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; denying 19 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting Report and Recommendations re 25 Report and Recommendations. Signed by District Judge Harry S Mattice, Jr on January 5, 2012. (CNH, )

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE at WINCHESTER EUGENE NOLAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, ) ) Defendant. ) ) Case No. 4:11-cv-5 Judge Mattice Magistrate Judge Lee ORDER On December 15, 2011, United States Magistrate Judge Susan K. Lee filed her Report and Recommendation (Doc. 25) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Magistrate Judge Lee recommended that: (1) Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record (Doc. 13) be granted; (2) Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 19) be denied; and (3) the Commissioner’s decision denying benefits be reversed and remanded pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for action consistent with the Report and Recommendation. In his Response to the Report and Recommendation, Defendant does not object to Magistrate Judge Lee’s conclusions. (Doc. 26). Accordingly, and upon review of the Report and Recommendation and the administrative record: • The Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Lee’s findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations pursuant to § 636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b); • Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record (Doc. 13) is GRANTED; • Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 19) is DENIED; • The Commissioner’s decision denying benefits is hereby REVERSED and REMANDED pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for action consistent with this Order and the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. SO ORDERED this 5th day of January, 2012. /s/Harry S. Mattice, Jr. HARRY S. MATTICE, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -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?