MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

SHASHI H. KEWALRAMANI, Magistrate Judge.

On October 10, 2018, this Court issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that the decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying benefits to Plaintiff T.L. ("Plaintiff") be reversed, and that the case be remanded to the Commissioner. Electronic Case Filing Number ("ECF No.") 25. Defendant Nancy A. Berryhill ("Defendant") filed objections to the Report and Recommendation on October 24, 2018. ECF No. 29.

Meanwhile, on October 11, 2018, and October 26, 2018—after the Court issued the Report and Recommendation—Plaintiff filed a statement of consent to have the magistrate judge conduct all proceedings in this case. ECF Nos. 27, 30. Because Defendant had previously filed her statement of consent on October 3, 2018, the case was reassigned to the magistrate judge for all further proceedings and final disposition on October 12, 2018. ECF Nos. 12, 28.

The Local Rules of the Central District plainly permit the parties to consent "at any time prior to the entry of judgment." L.R. 73-3. Because no judgment has been entered in this action, Plaintiff's consent is valid, and the case has been reassigned. ECF No. 28. But the Court will not enter judgment without first considering Defendant's objections, for two reasons. First, with the Report and Recommendation, the Court notified the parties they had the opportunity to file objections, and thus the Court finds it appropriate that any objections filed be considered. Second, even if the objections are not properly considered as objections, under the procedural circumstances described above, the Court will treat the objections as a request for reconsideration.

Accordingly, the Court has considered Defendant's objections, and has specifically reviewed those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which Defendant has objected. Although Defendant raises a number of points with respect to the Court's findings that the ALJ erred in discounting Plaintiff's credibility with respect to his claimed limitations and in failing to properly consider the opinions of Plaintiff's treating psychiatrist, these points are largely the same as those Defendant made in her Joint Stipulation. ECF No. 24. None of Defendant's objections cause the Court to reconsider its findings.

As such, the Court adopts and incorporates by reference the findings in the Report and Recommendation. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that judgment be entered reversing the decision of the Commissioner and remanding this action for further administrative proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation as incorporated into this Memorandum Opinion and Order.