Summary
remanding for an expert opinion at step three
Summary of this case from Reed v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.Opinion
Case No. 12-11473
07-09-2013
ESTHER L. MANSON, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.
HONORABLE AVERN COHN
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 21)
AND
GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR REMAND (Doc. 12)
AND
DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 16)
AND
REMANDING MATTER FOR FURTHER ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
I.
This is a social security case. Plaintiff Esther L. Manson appeals from the final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security (Commissioner) that she is not disabled and therefore not entitled to disability insurance benefits. The matter was referred to a magistrate judge for all pretrial proceedings. Plaintiff and the Commissioner filed cross motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff requested that the Commissioner's decision be reversed and benefits awarded, or that the matter be remanded for further proceedings.
The magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation (MJRR), recommending that plaintiff's motion be granted as to a remand and the Commissioner's motion be denied. Specifically, the magistrate judge recommends that the matter be remanded under sentence four to the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) for a hearing "so that the ALJ may (1) call a medical advisor or otherwise secure additional evidence by which to properly infer Manson's disability onset date, and (2) obtain an expert opinion regarding whether the listings for mental disorders, including Listing 12.04, have been met." MJRR at p. 1.
"A district court's authority to remand a case for further administrative proceedings is found in 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)." Hollon v. Commissioner, 447 F.3d 477, 482-83 (6th Cir. 2006). The statute permits only two types of remand: a sentence four (post-judgment) remand made in connection with a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the Commissioner's decision; and a sentence six (pre-judgment) remand where the court makes no substantive ruling as to the correctness of the Commissioner's decision. Hollon, 447 F.3d at 486 (citing Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 99-100, 111 S.Ct. 2157, 115 L.Ed.2d 78 (1991)).
II.
Neither party has filed objections to the MJRR and the time for filing objections has passed. The failure to file objections to the report and recommendation waives any further right to appeal. Smith v. Detroit Federation of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir.1987). Likewise, the failure to object to the magistrate judge's report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the motions. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).
However, the Court has reviewed the MJRR and agrees with the magistrate judge. Accordingly, the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of the Court. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The Commissioner's motion for summary judgment is DENIED.
This matter is REMANDED for further administrative proceedings consistent with the MJRR.
SO ORDERED.
______________________
AVERN COHN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to the attorneys of record on this date, July 9, 2013, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
Sakne Chami
Case Manager, (313) 234-5160