Kepford v. Berryhill, 8:17-CV-1931-T-30MAP. (2018)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20180719a75
Visitors: 15
Filed: Jul. 17, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 17, 2018
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION MARK A. PIZZO , Magistrate Judge . Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405(g), the Plaintiff seeks judicial review of an administrative decision denying his claims for Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) ( see doc. 1). At this juncture, the Commissioner seeks entry of an order remanding the case for further administrative action. The Commissioner asserts the following: "Upon remand, the Appeals Council will instruct and Administrative L
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION MARK A. PIZZO , Magistrate Judge . Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405(g), the Plaintiff seeks judicial review of an administrative decision denying his claims for Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) ( see doc. 1). At this juncture, the Commissioner seeks entry of an order remanding the case for further administrative action. The Commissioner asserts the following: "Upon remand, the Appeals Council will instruct and Administrative La..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
MARK A. PIZZO, Magistrate Judge.
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the Plaintiff seeks judicial review of an administrative decision denying his claims for Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) (see doc. 1). At this juncture, the Commissioner seeks entry of an order remanding the case for further administrative action. The Commissioner asserts the following: "Upon remand, the Appeals Council will instruct and Administrative Law Judge to reassess the opinion of the examining psychological consultant and provide sufficient rationale supported by substantial evidence, for the weight assigned to the opinion; reassess Plaintiff's residual functional capacity (RFC) and provide sufficient rationale, supported by substantial evidence, for the RFC finding; update the record, and issue a new decision." (doc. 23 at 1).
Plaintiff has no objection. Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED:
1. The Commissioner's Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand (doc. 23) be GRANTED and the case be remanded to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
2. The Clerk of Court be directed to enter judgment for the Plaintiff and administratively close this case.
IT IS SO REPORTED.
Source: Leagle
