Pelusio v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

Filing 28

ORDER adopting 27 Report and Recommendations in its entirety; granting 20 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 24 Motion for Summary Judgment and remanding case to Commissioner under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(f). Signed by Judge Thomas T. Cullen on 3/27/2024. (ck)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA DANVILLE DIVISION KATHLEEN P., Plaintiff, v. MARTIN O’MALLEY, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 4:22cv00125 ORDER By: Hon. Thomas T. Cullen United States District Judge In this social security appeal, the court referred Plaintiff Kathleen P.’s and the Commissioner’s motions for summary judgment (ECF Nos. 20 & 24) to Magistrate Judge Joel C. Hoppe for report and recommendation (“R&R”) under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Judge Hoppe entered his R&R on March 11, 2024, recommending that the court deny the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment, grant Plaintiff’s motion, and remand this case to the Commissioner for further proceedings. (ECF No. 27). Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2), the parties were given 14 days to file objections to the R&R, but none were filed. The court has reviewed the R&R for clear error. Finding none, it is hereby ORDERED that: (1) The R&R (ECF No. 27) is ADOPTED in its entirety; (2) Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 20) is GRANTED; (3) The Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 24) is DENIED; and (4) This case is REMANDED to the Commissioner under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings consistent with the R&R. The clerk is directed to forward a copy of this Order to the parties. ENTERED this 27th day of March, 2024. /s/ Thomas T. Cullen___________________ HON. THOMAS T. CULLEN 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?