Petty v. Colvin
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
Phillip T. Petty, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil No. 14-cv-1883 (APM)
)
Carolyn W. Colvin, )
Acting Commissioner of Social Security, )
)
Defendant. ) _________________________________________ )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the court on the Report and Recommendation (R&R) filed by Magistrate Judge Alan Kay on August 8, 2016. R&R, ECF No. 21. The 14-day period during which the parties may file objections to the R&R has expired, see Local Civil Rule 72.3(b), and neither party has filed objections.
Plaintiff Phillip T. Petty moved to have this matter remanded to the Social Security Administration for a new hearing. See Pl.’s Mot. for Summ. J., ECF No. 16. Defendant Colvin cross-moved for an order affirming the decision denying Plaintiff’s claim for supplemental security income payments. See Defs.’ Mot. for Summ. J., ECF No. 18. In a thorough R&R, Judge Kay recommended that the parties’ cross-motions be granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, he recommended that the court remand the case so that the Social Security Administration “can properly address Plaintiff’s moderate mental limitations in concentration, persistence, and pace with respect to his [residual functional capacity] and the hypothetical. The remaining challenges concerning Plaintiff’s social functioning, credibility, and the need to sit and stand should be denied.” R&R at 24-25.
After consideration of the R&R of Judge Kay, the absence of any party’s objection thereto, the entire record before the court, and the applicable law, the court will adopt Judge Kay’s R&R and grant in part and deny in part both parties’ Motions.
A separate final order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
Dated: September 2, 2016 Amit P. Mehta United States District Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Petty v. Colvin (Petty v. Colvin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.