Summary
acknowledging the possibility that error by ALJ in substituting his lay opinion for that of treating physician could be considered harmless, but remanding case because treating physician provided detailed explanations and references to objective medical evidence
Summary of this case from Carroll v. AstrueOpinion
Case No. 3:08cv00185.
July 29, 2009
DECISION AND ENTRY
The Court has conducted a de novo review of the Report and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington (Doc. #11), to whom this case was originally referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) has expired, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommendations.
It is therefore ORDERED that:
1. The Report and Recommendations filed on July 10, 2009 (Doc. #11) is ADOPTED in full;
2. The Commissioner's non-disability finding is VACATED;
3. No finding is made as to whether Plaintiff Mona Prunest was under a "disability" within the meaning of the Social Security Act;
4. This case is remanded to the Commissioner and the Administrative Law Judge under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further consideration consistent with this Decision and Entry and the Report and Recommendations; and
5. This case is terminated on the docket of this Court.