From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ward v. Colvin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA
May 27, 2014
CASE NO. C13-5356BHS (W.D. Wash. May. 27, 2014)

Summary

determining potential error was harmless when ALJ did not address prior closed period of disability because the ALJ found a more restrictive RFC in the current claim

Summary of this case from Bradley O. v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Opinion

CASE NO. C13-5356BHS

05-27-2014

ROBERT M. WARD, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT

AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of the Honorable J. Richard Creatura, United States Magistrate Judge. Dkt. 19. The Court having considered the R&R and the remaining record, and no objections having been filed, does hereby find and order as follows:

(1) The R&R is ADOPTED;
(2) Defendant's decision is REVERSED; and
(3) This action is REMANDED for further administrative proceedings in accordance with the findings contained in the R&R.

__________

BENJAMIN H. SETTLE

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Ward v. Colvin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA
May 27, 2014
CASE NO. C13-5356BHS (W.D. Wash. May. 27, 2014)

determining potential error was harmless when ALJ did not address prior closed period of disability because the ALJ found a more restrictive RFC in the current claim

Summary of this case from Bradley O. v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.
Case details for

Ward v. Colvin

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT M. WARD, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

Date published: May 27, 2014

Citations

CASE NO. C13-5356BHS (W.D. Wash. May. 27, 2014)

Citing Cases

Zamora v. Colvin

In fact, the ALJ found a more restrictive RFC than that found in the prior claim. (Compare AR 23 with AR 65);…

Bradley O. v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Tr. 129. Even if the ALJ erred by not specifically addressing res judicata or AR 97-4(9), any error would be…