STANDIFER v. COLVIN, 2:13-CV-01878-KJD-CWH. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20150616a31
Visitors: 7
Filed: Jun. 12, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 12, 2015
Summary: ORDER KENT J. DAWSON , District Judge . Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (#21) of Magistrate Judge C.W. Hoffman, Jr. entered on May 1, 2015, recommending that the present case be remanded for a determination of Plaintiff's residual functional capacity. Defendant Carolyn W. Colvin filed an objection (#22) to the report and recommendation. Plaintiff Sean Standifer filed a response (#23). This Court has conducted a de novo review of the record in this case
Summary: ORDER KENT J. DAWSON , District Judge . Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (#21) of Magistrate Judge C.W. Hoffman, Jr. entered on May 1, 2015, recommending that the present case be remanded for a determination of Plaintiff's residual functional capacity. Defendant Carolyn W. Colvin filed an objection (#22) to the report and recommendation. Plaintiff Sean Standifer filed a response (#23). This Court has conducted a de novo review of the record in this case ..
More
ORDER
KENT J. DAWSON, District Judge.
Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (#21) of Magistrate Judge C.W. Hoffman, Jr. entered on May 1, 2015, recommending that the present case be remanded for a determination of Plaintiff's residual functional capacity. Defendant Carolyn W. Colvin filed an objection (#22) to the report and recommendation. Plaintiff Sean Standifer filed a response (#23).
This Court has conducted a de novo review of the record in this case in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule IB 3-2. The Court determines that the Report and Recommendation (#21) of the United States Magistrate Judge entered May 1, 2015, should be ADOPTED and AFFIRMED.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (#21) entered May 1, 2015, are ADOPTED and AFFIRMED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Remand or Reversal (#16) be DENIED IN PART as to Plaintiff's request to reverse and GRANTED IN PART as to Plaintiff's request to remand.
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Defendant's Cross Motion to Affirm (#17) is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
