From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Morgan v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Oct 31, 2013
Case No. 12-12071 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 31, 2013)

Opinion

Case No. 12-12071

10-31-2013

PETER MORGAN, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.


Paul D. Borman

United States District Judge


R. Steven Whalen

United States Magistrate Judge


ORDER (1) ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION;

(2) GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PURSUANT

TO THE FOURTH SENTENCE OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) TO THE EXTENT THAT THIS

CASE BE REMANDED FOR FURTHER FACT-FINDING (Dkt. No. 9);

(3) DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR REMAND PURSUANT TO THE SIXTH

SENTENCE OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (Dkt. No. 12);

(4) DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Dkt. Nos. 18

& 22) TO THE EXTENT THEY SEEK AFFIRMANCE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE

DECISION

On September 3, 2013, Magistrate Judge Steven Whalen issued a Report and Recommendation addressing the outstanding motions in this action. (Dkt. No. 24). In the Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge recommends that this Court grant Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to the extent that this case be remanded for further fact-finding. (Dkt. No. 9). The Magistrate Judge also recommends the Court deny Plaintiff's motion for remand pursuant to the sixth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Dkt. No. 12). Further, the Magistrate Judge recommends denying Defendant's motions for summary judgment to the extent they seek affirmance of the administrative record. (Dkt. No. 18 & 22).

Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, and there being no timely objections from either party under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and E.D. Mich L.R. 72.1(d), the Court: 1. ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 24); and 2. GRANTS Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to the extent that this case be remanded for further fact-finding (Dkt. No. 9); 3. DENIES Plaintiff's motion for remand pursuant to the sixth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (Dkt. No. 12); 4. DENIES Defendant's motions for summary judgment (Dkt. Nos. 18 & 22); and 5. REMANDS this matter pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings consistent with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________

PAUL D. BORMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on October 31, 2013.

Deborah Tofil

Case Manager


Summaries of

Morgan v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Oct 31, 2013
Case No. 12-12071 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 31, 2013)
Case details for

Morgan v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Case Details

Full title:PETER MORGAN, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Oct 31, 2013

Citations

Case No. 12-12071 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 31, 2013)

Citing Cases

Snoddy v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

The Commissioner suggests that plaintiff has not shown that a mental RFC limitation to "simple, unskilled…