Stinnett v. Berryhill, No. 4:2016cv00252 - Document 16 (N.D. Tex. 2017)

Court Description: Order Adopting Findings and Recommendations re: 15 Findings and Recommendations on Case re: 1 Complaint,,,, filed by Gary Lee Stinnett, Sr.. Magistrate Judge E. Scott Frost no longer assigned to case. The commissioner of Social Security's decision is REVERSED AND REMANDED to the commissioner under the fourth sentence of 42 USC 405(g) for further proceedings. (Ordered by Senior Judge Terry R Means on 4/18/2017) (wrb)

Download PDF
Stinnett v. Berryhill Doc. 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION GARY LEE STINNETT, SR. VS. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY § § § § § § § Civil No. 4:16-CV-0252-Y ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS On March 31, 2017, the United States magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation in this case (doc. 15). The report gave all parties fourteen days thereafter to serve and file with the Court written objections to the magistrate judge's proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation. No written objections have been filed by either party. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Assoc., 79 F.3d 1415, 1428-29 (5th Cir. 1996). As a result, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), de novo review is not required. Nevertheless, the Court has reviewed the magistrate judge's findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain error and has found none. Thus, after consideration of this matter, the Court concludes that the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge should be and are hereby ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of this Court. It is therefore ORDERED that the commissioner of Social Security's decision is REVERSED and REMANDED to the commissioner under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings consistent with this order. SIGNED April 18, 2017. ____________________________ TERRY R. MEANS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dockets.Justia.com

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.