Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Charrette v. Commissioner of Social Security, 15-cv-10930. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20160902743 Visitors: 2
Filed: Sep. 01, 2016
Latest Update: Sep. 01, 2016
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [17] IN FULL, GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [15], DENYING THE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [16], AND REMANDING TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE JUDITH E. LEVY , District Judge . This is a Social Security appeal. Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Grand's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 17) recommending the Court grant in part and deny in
More

OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [17] IN FULL, GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [15], DENYING THE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [16], AND REMANDING TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE

This is a Social Security appeal. Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Grand's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 17) recommending the Court grant in part and deny in part plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 15), deny defendant's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 16), and remand to the Administrative Law Judge for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation. The parties were required to file specific written objections within fourteen days of service. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2); E.D. Mich. LR 72.1(d). No objections were filed. Accordingly, and on review of the Report and Recommendation,

The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 17) is adopted in full. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 15) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 16) is DENIED. The case is remanded to the Administrative Law Judge for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation.

The Court emphasizes that the Administrative Law Judge should consider the records (as well as any other records available at that time) noted in the Report and Recommendation's footnote 9.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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