ABATE v. U.S. COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, 6:14-cv-02889. (2015)
Court: District Court, W.D. Louisiana
Number: infdco20160122c85
Visitors: 21
Filed: Dec. 29, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 29, 2015
Summary: JUDGMENT RICHARD T. HAIK , District Judge . This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Patrick J. Hanna for report and recommendation. After an independent review of the record, and noting the absence of any objections, this Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation is correct and adopts the findings and conclusions therein as its own. Accordingly, IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and
Summary: JUDGMENT RICHARD T. HAIK , District Judge . This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Patrick J. Hanna for report and recommendation. After an independent review of the record, and noting the absence of any objections, this Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation is correct and adopts the findings and conclusions therein as its own. Accordingly, IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and ..
More
JUDGMENT
RICHARD T. HAIK, District Judge.
This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Patrick J. Hanna for report and recommendation. After an independent review of the record, and noting the absence of any objections, this Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation is correct and adopts the findings and conclusions therein as its own.
Accordingly, IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and REMANDED to the Commissioner for further administrative action pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).1 The Commissioner is instructed to (1) fully and completely develop the record with regard the claimant's residual functional capacity by obtaining a functional analysis by a treating physician or by a consultative examiner who meets with the claimant and evaluates her functionality; (2) permit the claimant to supplement the record as appropriate or necessary; (3) again evaluate the claimant's residual functional capacity; and (4) again evaluate whether the claimant was disabled on or after May 31, 2009. The claimant shall be afforded the opportunity to submit additional evidence and to testify at a supplemental hearing.
FootNotes
1. A fourth sentence remand constitutes a "final judgment" that triggers the filing period for an EAJA fee application. Shalala v. Schaeffer, 509 U.S. 292, 113 S.Ct. 2625, 2631 (1993); Freeman v. Shalala, 2 F.3d 552 (5th Cir. 1993).
Source: Leagle
