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, )
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?