2:14-cv-00021
S.D. Ohio
Jun 30, 2014

WINONA BARSTOW, Plaintiff, vs. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

Civil Action 2:14-cv-0021

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

June 30, 2014

Judge Watson; Magistrate Judge King

Case: 2:14-cv-00021-MHW-NMK Doc #: 17 Filed: 06/30/14 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 909

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

The parties have jointly moved to remand the case, pursuant to Sentence 4 of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further administrative proceedings. Joint Motion for Remand, ECF 16.

It is therefore RECOMMENDED that the decision of the Commissioner be reversed and that this action be remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security, pursuant to Sentence 4 of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further administrative proceedings.

If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14) days, file and serve on all parties objections to the Report and Recommendation, specifically designating this Report and Recommendation, and the part thereof in question, as well as the basis for objection thereto. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Response to objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

The parties are specifically advised that the failure to object to the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to de novo review by the District Judge and waiver of the right to appeal the judgment of the District Court. See, e.g., Pfahler v. Nat‘l Latex Prod. Co., 517 F.3d 816, 829 (6th Cir. 2007) (holding that “failure to object to the magistrate judge‘s recommendations constituted a waiver of [the defendant‘s] ability to appeal the district court‘s ruling“); United States v. Sullivan, 431 F.3d 976, 984 (6th Cir. 2005) (holding that defendant waived appeal of district court‘s denial of pretrial motion by failing to timely object to magistrate judge‘s report and recommendation). Even when timely objections are filed, appellate review of issues not raised in those objections is waived. Robert v. Tesson, 507 F.3d 981, 994 (6th Cir. 2007) (“[A] general objections to a magistrate judge‘s report, which fails to specify the issues of contention, does not suffice to preserve an issue for appeal . . . .“) (citation omitted)).

s/Norah McCann King

Norah McCann King

United States Magistrate Judge

June 30, 2014