Filed: Dec. 06, 2019
Latest Update: Dec. 06, 2019
Summary: ORDER PAUL S. DIAMOND , District Judge . AND NOW, this 5th day of December, 2019, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Brief and Statement of Issues in Support of Request for Review (Doc. No. 9), Defendant's Response (Doc. Nos. 12, 13), and Plaintiff's Reply (Doc. No. 14), as well as the administrative record herein (Doc. Nos. 5, 8), and after careful review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells (Doc. No. 17), to which no objections have
Summary: ORDER PAUL S. DIAMOND , District Judge . AND NOW, this 5th day of December, 2019, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Brief and Statement of Issues in Support of Request for Review (Doc. No. 9), Defendant's Response (Doc. Nos. 12, 13), and Plaintiff's Reply (Doc. No. 14), as well as the administrative record herein (Doc. Nos. 5, 8), and after careful review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells (Doc. No. 17), to which no objections have b..
More
ORDER
PAUL S. DIAMOND, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 5th day of December, 2019, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Brief and Statement of Issues in Support of Request for Review (Doc. No. 9), Defendant's Response (Doc. Nos. 12, 13), and Plaintiff's Reply (Doc. No. 14), as well as the administrative record herein (Doc. Nos. 5, 8), and after careful review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells (Doc. No. 17), to which no objections have been made, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 17) is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
2. The relief sought in Plaintiff's Brief and Statement of Issues in Support of Request for Review (Doc. No. 9) is GRANTED;
3. This case is REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security so that the ALJ can: (a) discuss the evidence and provide an adequate explanation of the weight accorded to Dr. Goebel's report and explain her determination that Plaintiff's impairment does not meet the "paragraph C" criteria for the relevant listed impairments; (b) properly assess Plaintiff's credibility, properly weigh the medical opinion evidence, and reassess Plaintiff's mental RFC; and (c) properly apply Plaintiff's age on her last insured date and explicitly incorporate that age in her hypothetical questions to the VE;
4. JUDGMENT is entered in favor of Plaintiff Karen Ann Preston, and against Defendant Nancy A. Berryhill, Commissioner of Social Security;
5. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
