JENKINS v. COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, 6:11-CV-176. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. Texas
Number: infdco20120619b92
Visitors: 9
Filed: Jun. 18, 2012
Latest Update: Jun. 18, 2012
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER, Judge. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which contains her findings, conclusions, and recommendation for the disposition of this action, has been presented for consideration. The Report and Recommendation recommends that the action be reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g) with instructions for further consideration and posing of an appropriate h
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER, Judge. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which contains her findings, conclusions, and recommendation for the disposition of this action, has been presented for consideration. The Report and Recommendation recommends that the action be reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g) with instructions for further consideration and posing of an appropriate hy..
More
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER, Judge.
The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which contains her findings, conclusions, and recommendation for the disposition of this action, has been presented for consideration. The Report and Recommendation recommends that the action be reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) with instructions for further consideration and posing of an appropriate hypothetical question to a vocational expert. No written objections have been filed. The findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are therefore adopted as those of the Court. In light of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that the complaint is hereby REVERSED and REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) with instructions for further consideration consistent with the findings above. It is further
ORDERED that any motion not previously ruled on is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
