(SS) Caldera v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 2:2015cv02031 - Document 31 (E.D. Cal. 2017)
Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 09/29/2017. The court DECLINES to adopt the findings and recommendations 28 and REMANDS the matter back to the magistrate judge. (Andrews, P)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(SS) Caldera v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NINOSKA CALDERA, 12 13 14 15 16 No. 2:15-CV-2031-KJM-CMK Plaintiff, v. ORDER COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. 17 18 Plaintiff, who is proceeding with retained counsel, brings this action for judicial 19 review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security under 42 U.S.C. ยง 405(g). The 20 matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by Eastern District of 21 California local rules. 22 On September 1, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations, 23 which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections 24 within a specified time. Timely objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed. 25 The court finds, after careful review, the findings and recommendations are neither 26 sufficiently explained nor sufficiently supported by the record or case law for this court to 27 determine if the proposed determination is correct as a matter of law. Accordingly, the court 28 DECLINES to adopt the findings and recommendations and instead REMANDS the matter to the 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 magistrate judge for the preparation of a new document that fully explains his findings and 2 recommendations and the reasons therefor. The parties shall have a new opportunity to file 3 objections to those findings and recommendations once they are filed. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 This order resolves ECF No. 28. 6 DATED: September 29, 2017. 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
