Wilhelm v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Full title: JAMES D. WILHELM, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Date published: Jan 23, 2013

Civil Action 2:12-cv-752 (S.D. Ohio Jan. 23, 2013)

Opinion

Civil Action 2:12-cv-752

01-23-2013

JAMES D. WILHELM, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

Norah McCann King

Judge Marbley

Magistrate Judge King

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff has moved to remand this action to the Commissioner, pursuant to Sentence 6 of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for consideration of new and material evidence. Doc. No. 16. The Commissioner has not opposed the motion.

It is RECOMMENDED that plaintiff's unopposed motion to remand, Doc. No. 16, be granted and that the action be remanded to the Commissioner, pursuant to Sentence 6 of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for consideration of new and material evidence.

If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14) days, file and serve on all parties objections to the Report and Recommendation, specifically designating this Report and Recommendation, and the part thereof in question, as well as the basis for objection thereto. 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Response to objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to de novo review by the District Judge and of the right to appeal the decision of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers, Local 231 etc., 829 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir. 1987); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).

___________

Norah McCann King

United States Magistrate Judge