The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
SARAH B.1, Case No. 2:24-cv-3955
Plaintiff, Marbley, D.J.
Litkovitz, M.J.
vs.
COMMISSIONER OF REPORT AND
SOCIAL SECURITY, RECOMMENDATION
Defendant.
This matter is before the Court on the parties’ joint motion to remand this case for further
administrative proceedings pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and to enter
judgment in favor of plaintiff pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. (Doc. 8).
Pursuant to the parties’ agreement, this matter shall be remanded back to the
Commissioner for further administrative proceedings pursuant to Sentence Four of Section 205
of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On remand, the claim will be completely
reevaluated starting at the beginning of the sequential evaluation, including offering plaintiff a
new hearing.
IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT:
1. The parties’ joint motion to remand (Doc. 8) be GRANTED;
2. This case be REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security for further
administrative proceedings; and
1Pursuant to General Order 22-01, due to significant privacy concerns in social security cases, any opinion,
order, judgment or other disposition in social security cases in the Southern District of Ohio shall refer to plaintiffs
only by their first names and last initials.
3. The Clerk of Court be DIRECTED to enter a separate judgment as required by Fed.
R. Civ. P. 58.
Date: 2/21/2025 Herm Rethovd-
Karen L. Litkovitz
United States Magistrate Judge
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
SARAH B., Case No. 2:24-cv-3955
Plaintiff, Marbley, D.J.
Litkovitz, M.J.
vs.
COMMISSIONER OF
SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES REGARDING THE FILING OF OBJECTIONS TO R&R
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), WITHIN 14 DAYS after being served with a copy of
the recommended disposition, a party may serve and file specific written objections to the
proposed findings and recommendations. This period may be extended further by the Court on
timely motion for an extension. Such objections shall specify the portions of the Report objected
to and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the objections. If the Report
and Recommendation is based in whole or in part upon matters occurring on the record at an oral
hearing, the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or such
portions of it as all parties may agree upon, or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the
assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond to another party's objections
WITHIN 14 DAYS after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to make objections in
accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140
(1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
3