MARTELL v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION COMMISSIONER, No. 2:2020cv00179 - Document 22 (D. Me. 2021)
Court Description: ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE accepting 21 Report and Recommended Decision re: 13 SS Statement of Errors/Facts Sheet By JUDGE JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR. (CCS)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
MARTELL v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION COMMISSIONER Doc. 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE CHRISTIN M., Plaintiff v. ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2:20-cv-00179-JAW ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE No objection having been filed to the Magistrate Judge’s Recommended Decision filed April 25, 2021 (ECF No. 21), the Court accepts the Recommended Decision. The Court has reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge’s Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; the Court has made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge’s Recommended Decision; and the Court concurs with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in his Recommended Decision, and determines that no further proceeding is necessary. Dockets.Justia.com Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 21) of the Magistrate Judge is ACCEPTED and the Court VACATES the Commissioner’s administrative decision and REMANDS the case for proceedings consistent with the Recommended Decision. SO ORDERED. /s/ John A. Woodcock, Jr. JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated this 11th day of May, 2021 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.
