Jerome v. Astrue, No. 4:2009cv00020 - Document 23 (D. Mont. 2009)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 21 Findings and Recommendations. 1) Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment 11 is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as addressed in Judge Strong's Findings and Recommendations filed 11/12 /09. 2) Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 14 is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as addressed in Judge Strong's Findings and Recommendations filed 11/12/09. 3) The case is REMANDED to the ALJ for consideration of the issues raised by the Findings and Recommendations of Magistrate Strong. Signed by Judge Sam E Haddon on 12/7/2009. (SLR, ) Modified on 12/7/2009 to insert links to Mtns for SJ. (SLR, ).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Jerome v. Astrue Doc. 23 7 Prl 2 07 v IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUtRl::-y( c: L X FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA GREAT FALLS DIVISION WENDY J. JEROME, CV 09-20-GF-SEH Plaintiff, ORDER vs. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. On October 23, 2008, United States Magistrate Judge Keith Strong entered Findings and Recommendation! in this matter. No objections were filed. No review is required ofproposed findings and recommendations to which no objection is made. Thomas v. Am, 474 U.S. 140, 149-152 (1986). However, this Court will review Judge Strong's Findings and Recommendation for clear error. I Docket No.6. -1- Dockets.Justia.com Upon review, I find no clear error in Judge Strong's Findings and Recommendation and adopt them in full. ORDERED: 1. Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment2 is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as addressed in Judge Strong's Findings and Recommendations filed November 12,2009. 2. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgmene is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as addressed in Judge Strong's Findings and Recommendations filed November 12, 2009. 3. The case is REMANDED to the ALI for consideration ofthe issues raised by the Findings and Recommendations of Magistrate Strong. DATED this of December, 2009. United States District Court , Docket No. 11. 3 Docket No. 14. -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.
