From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hopkins v. Commissioner of Social Security

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division
May 14, 2009
Case No. 1:07-cv-964 (S.D. Ohio May. 14, 2009)

Summary

remanding for award of benefits where the ALJ rejected the report of the plaintiff's treating neurologist in favor of a non-examining internist

Summary of this case from Sucharski v. Astrue

Opinion

Case No. 1:07-cv-964.

May 14, 2009


ORDER


This matter is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation filed April 15, 2009 (Doc. 11).

Proper notice has been given to the parties under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), including notice that the parties would waive further appeal if they failed to file objections to the Report and Recommendation in a timely manner. See United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). No objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation have been filed.

Having reviewed this matter de novo pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, we find the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation correct.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED. This action is REVERSED pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and REMANDED for a determination of the appropriate onset date and an award of benefits.


Summaries of

Hopkins v. Commissioner of Social Security

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division
May 14, 2009
Case No. 1:07-cv-964 (S.D. Ohio May. 14, 2009)

remanding for award of benefits where the ALJ rejected the report of the plaintiff's treating neurologist in favor of a non-examining internist

Summary of this case from Sucharski v. Astrue
Case details for

Hopkins v. Commissioner of Social Security

Case Details

Full title:Dawn Hopkins, Plaintiff, v. Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division

Date published: May 14, 2009

Citations

Case No. 1:07-cv-964 (S.D. Ohio May. 14, 2009)

Citing Cases

Woldt v. Astrue

The Court reminds the ALJ that he cannot selectively include only those portions of reports that show a…

Tyser v. Astrue

Thus, "`[w]hen a claimant with multiple sclerosis applies for social security benefits, it is error to focus…