Morton Thompson v. Colvin

Filing 29

ORDER that the SECOND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge 26 is adopted on the basis of the reasoning of the SECOND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; The plaintiff's MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 13 is granted; The DEFENDANT'S M OTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 15 is denied; and The Commissioner's decision is vacated and remanded; It is further ORDERED that the issues are adequately addressed by the briefs and oral argument would not materially aid the decisional process. It is so ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 9/14/2015. Order electronically sent to all counsel of record. (sbea, )

It
IN

THE

FOR THE

UNITED

STATES DISTRICT

iL R

SEP I 4 2015

COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Richmond Division

CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
RICHMOND. VA

DONYELLE

PLESHETTE

MORTON THOMPSON,

Plaintiff,
Civil Action No.

V .

CAROLYN W.

3:14cvl79

COLVIN,

Defendant.

ORDER

Having reviewed the SECOND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the
Magistrate Judge entered herein on August 19, 2015 (Docket No. 26),
the DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S SECOND REPORT

AND

RECOMMENDATION

(Docket

No.

27),

the

PLAINTIFF'S

RESPONSE

TO

DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S SECOND REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION (Docket No. 28), and having considered the record and

the SECOND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION and finding no error therein,
i t is hereby ORDERED that:
(1)

The

DEFENDANT'S

OBJECTIONS

SECOND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

(2)
Judge
the

THE

(Docket No.

MAGISTRATE

27)

JUDGE'S

are overruled;

The SECOND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate

(Docket No.

26)

is adopted on the basis of the reasoning of

SECOND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION;

(3)
13)

TO

The plaintiff's MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

is granted;

y)

(Docket No.

(4)

15)

The DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

is denied;
(5)

(Docket No.

and

The Commissioner's decision is vacated and remanded;

It is further ORDERED that the issues are adequately addressed

by

the

briefs

and

oral

argument

would

not

materially

aid

the

decisional process.
It

is

so ORDERED.

/s/

Robert E. Payne
Senior United States District Judge

Richmond, Virginia
Date: September 14, 2015