Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02110/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02110-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 1 - 09cv2110

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EDNA F. LEWIS,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 09cv2110-MMA(WMc)

vs. ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND

ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED

STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE;

[Doc. No. 27]

GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT;

[Doc. No. 20]

DENYING DEFENDANT’S CROSS -

MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT

[Doc. No. 25]

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of

Social Security,

Defendant.

On September 25, 2009, Plaintiff Edna F. Lewis, on behalf of Randel S. Davis (deceased),

filed this appeal of the final judgment of the Commissioner of Social Security denying her son’s

claim for Supplemental Security Income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act (“Act”), 42

U.S.C §§ 1381, et seq. The matter was referred to the Honorable William McCurine, Jr., United

States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Civil Local Rule 72.1. On

February 25, 2011, Judge McCurine filed a thorough and well-reasoned Report containing findings

and conclusions, upon which he bases his recommendation that the Court grant Plaintiff’s motion for

Case 3:09-cv-02110-MMA-WMC Document 28 Filed 03/28/11 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 - 09cv2110

summary judgment in part, deny Defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment, and remand this

case to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with his recommendation. 

Neither party objected to the Report and Recommendation, and the time for filing objections

has expired. 

The Court has considered the pleadings and memoranda of the parties as well as the

administrative record, and has made a review and determination in accordance with the requirements

of 28 U.S.C. § 636 and applicable case law. Accordingly, good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 27] is ADOPTED in its entirety; 

2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 20] is GRANTED in part; and

3. Defendant’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 25] is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT this case is REMANDED to the Commissioner of

Social Security for further administrative proceedings consistent with this opinion, pursuant to

sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). See Akopyan v. Barnhart, 296 F.3d 852, 854 (9th Cir. 2002).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: March 28, 2011

Hon. Michael M. Anello

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-02110-MMA-WMC Document 28 Filed 03/28/11 Page 2 of 2