Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

AVELLO v. COLVIN, 2:13-cv-00504-RFB-GWF. (2014)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20141103852 Visitors: 17
Filed: Oct. 31, 2014
Latest Update: Oct. 31, 2014
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE GEORGE W. FOLEY RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II, District Judge. Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 51) of the Honorable George W. Foley, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge, entered September 16, 2014. Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2(a), objections were due by October 3, 2014. No objections have been filed. The Court has reviewed the record in this case and concurs with Magistrate Judge's recommendati
More

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE GEORGE W. FOLEY

RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II, District Judge.

Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 51) of the Honorable George W. Foley, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge, entered September 16, 2014.

Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2(a), objections were due by October 3, 2014. No objections have been filed. The Court has reviewed the record in this case and concurs with Magistrate Judge's recommendation(s) that (ECF No. 32) Plaintiff's Motion to Reverse or Remand the Commissioner's Decision Pursuant to Sentence Four; Plaintiff's (ECF No. 34) Second Motion to Reverse or Remand the Commissioners Decision Pursuant to Sentence Six; and the Commissioner's (ECF No. 44) Motion for Remand Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. Section 405(g) be Granted in Part and Denied in Part, and that this case be remanded to the Social Security Administration for further determination of when Plaintiff became disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act. Therefore, the Court has determined that Magistrate Judge's Recommendation should be ACCEPTED and ADOPTED to the extent that it is not inconsistent with this opinion. . . . . . .

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 51) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full. (ECF No. 32) Plaintiff's Motion to Reverse or Remand the Commissioner's Decision Pursuant to Sentence Four; Plaintiff's (ECF No. 34) Second Motion to Reverse or Remand the Commissioners Decision Pursuant to Sentence Six; and the Commissioner's (ECF No. 44) Motion for Remand Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. Section 405(g) be Granted in Part and Denied in Part, and that this case be remanded to the Social Security Administration for further determination of when Plaintiff became disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act.

The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close case.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer