Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Haase v. Colvin

United States District Court, Eighth Circuit

December 6, 2013

Stuart L. Haase, Plaintiff,
v.
Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

LEO I. BRISBOIS, Magistrate Judge.

This matter is before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to a general assignment, made in accordance with the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. ยง636(b)(1)(A), and upon general supervision of the cases that pend before the Court, and upon the Hon. Patrick J. Schiltz's Order of Reference. [Docket No. 13] (referring all dispositive and non-dispositive motions).

Stuart L. Haase ("Plaintiff"), proceeding pro se, initiated this action on or about April 22, 2013, by filing his Complaint. [Docket No. 1]). Acting Commissioner of Social Security Carolyn W. Colvin ("Defendant" or "Commissioner") filed her Answer, [Docket No. 4], and the Administrative Record, [Docket No. 5], on June 19, 2013. On September 26, 2013, Plaintiff filed a docket styled "Plaintiff's Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and Notice of Appearance Pro Se, " [Docket No. 10], which the Court construes as a Motion for Summary Judgment. (See Order [Docket No. 14]). In response, the Commissioner filed a Motion for Remand, [Docket No. 15], but indicated that Defendant's counsel had been unable to meet-and-confer with Plaintiff regarding the motion.

On November 25, 2013, this Court Ordered the parties to meet-and-confer with regard to Defendant's Motion to Remand, [Docket No. 15], and to inform the Court whether remand was acceptable to both sides. (Order [Docket No. 16]). Subsequently, on November 27, 2013, the Commissioner notified the Court by Letter, [Docket No. 17], that the parties had met-and-conferred, and that Plaintiff did not object to a remand. On December 2, 2013, the parties filed a Stipulation to Remand. [Docket No. 18]).

Based on the foregoing, and all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED:

1. That the parties' Stipulation for Remand, [Docket No. 18], be GRANTED, and that this case be REMANDED to the Social Security Administration; and
2. That this case be DISMISSED without prejudice.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.