Cordell v. Commissioner of Social Security

N.D. West Virginia

Cordell v. Commissioner of Social Security

DecidedNovember 22, 2019

Docket3:19-cv-00047

StatusUnknown

This text of Cordell v. Commissioner of Social Security (Cordell v. Commissioner of Social Security) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. West Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cordell v. Commissioner of Social Security, (N.D.W. Va. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA MARTINSBURG

CHAD JOSEPH CORDELL,

Plaintiff,

v. CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:19-CV-47 (GROH)

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On this day, the above-styled matter came before this Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Michael John Aloi [ECF No. 28], entered on November 4, 2019, to which neither party filed objections. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions of the R&R to which objection is made. However, failure to file objections permits the district court to review the R&R under the standard that it believes to be appropriate, and under these circumstances, the parties’ right to de novo review is waived. See Webb v. Califano, 468 F. Supp. 825, 830-31 (E.D. Cal. 1979). Pursuant to Magistrate Judge Aloi’s R&R, as well as 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6, objections were due within fourteen plus three days after entry of the R&R. Because no objections have been filed, this Court will review the R&R for clear error. Upon review and finding no clear error, it is the opinion of this Court that Magistrate Judge Aloi’s R&R [ECF No. 28] should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED. For the reasons more fully stated in the R&R, this Court ORDERS that the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 23] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART and the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 25] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Commissioner’s decision is hereby vacated and this case is remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent and in accord with the R&R. The Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice [ECF No. 27] is hereby TERMINATED as MOOT. The Court further ORDERS that this matter be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and STRICKEN from the Court's active docket. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, the Clerk is DIRECTED to enter a separate order of judgment in favor of the Plaintiff. The Clerk is further DIRECTED to transmit copies of this Order to all counsel of record herein. DATED: November 22, 2019

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA MARTINSBURG

CHAD JOSEPH CORDELL,

Plaintiff,

v. CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:19-CV-47 (GROH)

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On this day, the above-styled matter came before this Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Michael John Aloi [ECF No. 28], entered on November 4, 2019, to which neither party filed objections. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions of the R&R to which objection is made. However, failure to file objections permits the district court to review the R&R under the standard that it believes to be appropriate, and under these circumstances, the parties’ right to de novo review is waived. See Webb v. Califano, 468 F. Supp. 825, 830-31 (E.D. Cal. 1979). Pursuant to Magistrate Judge Aloi’s R&R, as well as 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6, objections were due within fourteen plus three days after entry of the R&R. Because no objections have been filed, this Court will review the R&R for clear error. Upon review and finding no clear error, it is the opinion of this Court that Magistrate Judge Aloi’s R&R [ECF No. 28] should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED. For the reasons more fully stated in the R&R, this Court ORDERS that the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 23] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART and the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 25] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Commissioner’s decision is hereby vacated and this case is remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent and in accord with the R&R. The Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice [ECF No. 27] is hereby TERMINATED as MOOT. The Court further ORDERS that this matter be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and STRICKEN from the Court's active docket. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, the Clerk is DIRECTED to enter a separate order of judgment in favor of the Plaintiff. The Clerk is further DIRECTED to transmit copies of this Order to all counsel of record herein. DATED: November 22, 2019

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Cordell v. Commissioner of Social Security, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cordell-v-commissioner-of-social-security-wvnd-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack