Hoerle v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 2:2021cv11605 - Document 16 (E.D. Mich. 2022)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER denying 13 and granting in part and denying in part 11 . Signed by District Judge Linda V. Parker. (AFla)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Hoerle v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 16 Case 2:21-cv-11605-LVP-PTM ECF No. 16, PageID.974 Filed 07/05/22 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION KEVIN LEE HOERLE, Plaintiff, Civil Case No. 21-11605 Honorable Linda V. Parker v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. ________________________________/ OPINION AND ORDER On July 11, 2021, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit challenging a final decision of the Commissioner denying Plaintiff’s application for social security benefits. On the same date, this Court referred the lawsuit to Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris for all pretrial proceedings, including a hearing and determination of all non-dispositive matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and/or a report and recommendation (“R&R”) on all dispositive matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The parties subsequently filed cross-motions for summary judgment. On June 16, 2022, Magistrate Judge Morris issued an R&R recommending that this Court deny the Commissioner’s motion, grant in part and deny in part Plaintiff’s motion, and remand the matter for further proceedings. At the Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:21-cv-11605-LVP-PTM ECF No. 16, PageID.975 Filed 07/05/22 Page 2 of 2 conclusion of the R&R, Magistrate Judge Morris advises the parties that they may object to and seek review of the R&R within fourteen days of service upon them. She further specifically advises the parties that “[f]ailure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right to appeal.” Neither Plaintiff nor Defendant filed objections to the R&R. The Court has carefully reviewed the R&R and concurs with the conclusions reached by Magistrate Judge Morris. The Court therefore adopts the magistrate judge’s recommendations. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Commissioner of Social Security’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 11) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and this matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Linda V. Parker LINDA V. PARKER U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: July 5, 2022 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.
