Yang v. O'Malley
U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota
Yang v. O'Malley
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Hue Y., File No. 23-cv-209 (ECT/DJF)
Plaintiff,
v. ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION
Martin J. O’Malley, Commissioner of Social
Security Administration,
Defendant.
________________________________________________________________________
Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a Report and Recommendation on
December 29, 2023. ECF No. 20. No party has objected to that Report and
Recommendation, and it is therefore reviewed for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b);
Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795(8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Finding no clear error, and based upon all of the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 20] is ACCEPTED IN PART;1 and 2. Plaintiff’s Request for Relief [ECF No. 16] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; 3. The Commissioner’s Request for Relief [ECF No. 18] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; and 1 The Report and Recommendation’s recommendation to reverse the Commissioner’s Decision is rejected in light of the case’s disposition. 4. The matter is remanded to the Social Security Administration pursuant to sentence four of42 U.S.C. § 405
(g) for further proceedings consistent with the Report and
Recommendation.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: January 17, 2024 s/ Eric C. Tostrud
Eric C. Tostrud
United States District Court Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Hue Y., File No. 23-cv-209 (ECT/DJF)
Plaintiff,
v. ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION
Martin J. O’Malley, Commissioner of Social
Security Administration,
Defendant.
________________________________________________________________________
Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a Report and Recommendation on
December 29, 2023. ECF No. 20. No party has objected to that Report and
Recommendation, and it is therefore reviewed for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b);
Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795(8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Finding no clear error, and based upon all of the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 20] is ACCEPTED IN PART;1 and 2. Plaintiff’s Request for Relief [ECF No. 16] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; 3. The Commissioner’s Request for Relief [ECF No. 18] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; and 1 The Report and Recommendation’s recommendation to reverse the Commissioner’s Decision is rejected in light of the case’s disposition. 4. The matter is remanded to the Social Security Administration pursuant to sentence four of42 U.S.C. § 405
(g) for further proceedings consistent with the Report and
Recommendation.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: January 17, 2024 s/ Eric C. Tostrud
Eric C. Tostrud
United States District Court Reference
- Status
- Unknown