From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hazlak v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Apr 19, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-312 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 19, 2018)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-312

04-19-2018

LORI LYNN HAZLAK, Plaintiff v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant


( ) ORDER

AND NOW, this 19th day of April, 2018, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 17) of Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr., recommending that the court vacate the decision of the administrative law judge denying the application of plaintiff Lori Lynn Hazlak ("Hazlak"), for supplemental security income and remand this matter for further proceedings, wherein Judge Saporito opines that the administrative law judge's decision is not "supported by substantial evidence," 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and it appearing that neither Hazlak nor the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner") object to the report, see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and that the Commissioner has expressly waived the opportunity to do so, (see Doc. 18), and the court noting that failure to timely object to a magistrate judge's conclusions "may result in forfeiture of de novo review at the district court level," Nara v. Frank, 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007) (citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878-79 (3d Cir. 1987)), but that, as a matter of good practice, a district court should "afford some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report," Henderson, 812 F.2d at 878; see also Taylor v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 83 F. Supp. 3d 625, 626 (M.D. Pa. 2015) (citing Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Int'l, Inc., 702 F. Supp. 2d 465, 469 (M.D. Pa. 2010)), in order to "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record," FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes, and, following review of the record, the court in agreement with Judge Saporito's recommendation, and concluding that there is no clear error on the face of the record, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. The report (Doc. 17) of Magistrate Judge Saporito is ADOPTED.

2. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of Hazlak and against the Commissioner as set forth in the following paragraph.

3. The Commissioner's decision is VACATED and this matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner with instructions to conduct a new administrative hearing, develop the record fully, and evaluate the evidence appropriately in accordance with this order and the report (Doc. 17) of Magistrate Judge Saporito.

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER

Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge

United States District Court

Middle District of Pennsylvania


Summaries of

Hazlak v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Apr 19, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-312 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 19, 2018)
Case details for

Hazlak v. Berryhill

Case Details

Full title:LORI LYNN HAZLAK, Plaintiff v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Apr 19, 2018

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-312 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 19, 2018)

Citing Cases

Gines v. Saul

Currently, the State of Pennsylvania licenses psychologists who have a doctorate's degree. However, there was…