The opinion of the court was delivered by: James Knoll Gardner United States District Judge
NOW, this 25th day of August, 2011, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Brief and Statement of Issues in Support of Her Request for Review, which brief was filed December 20, 2010; upon consideration of Defendant's Response to Request for Review by Plaintiff, which response was filed January 11, 2011; upon consideration of Plaintiff's Reply to Defendant's Response to Request for Review by Plaintiff, which reply was filed January 13, 2011; upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge M. Faith Angell filed July 18, 2011; upon consideration of plaintiff's Civil Complaint filed September 9, 2010, defendant's Answer filed November 5, 2010, and after a thorough review of the record inthis matter; it appearing that neither party filed objections toMagistrate Judge Angell's Report and Recommendation; it furtherappearing that Magistrate Judge Angell's Report and Recommendation correctly determined the legal and factual issuespresented in this case, IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Angell's Report and Recommendation filed July 18, 2011 is approved and adopted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's request for review is granted in part and denied in part. *fn1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's request for review in the nature of a request to remand this matter for further administrative proceedings is granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, consistent with the Report and Recommendation, this matter is remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for the Administrative Law Judge to:
(1) adequately explain the reasons for giving the residual functional capacity assessment of Dr. Louis Tedesco, M.D., the state agency reviewing physician, greater weight than the report and medical records of Dr. Robert Schwartzman, M.D., plaintiff's neurologist and treating physician;
(2) develop the record pursuant to Social Security Ruling 87-6 by obtaining a record of plaintiff's blood drug levels, either from Dr. Robert Schwartzman, M.D. (if he has any such records), or by ordering an examination of plaintiff's blood drug levels, to be paid for by the Social Security Administration; and
(3) develop the record with respect to plaintiff's claims that her past work as a college professor and home repairman should not be considered substantial gainful activity because it was performed under special conditions, as listed in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1573(c), that took into account plaintiff's impairments.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's request for review in the nature of a request to grant Social Security Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income payments to plaintiff during the alleged period of disability is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall mark this case closed for statistical purposes.