Isaac St. John v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10

11 ISAAC ST. JOHN, ) Case No.: 1:25-cv-0069 JLT HBK ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL THE FINDINGS ) AND RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING 13 ) PLAINTIFF’S APPEAL, DENYING THE v. ) COMMISSIONER’S REQUEST TO AFFIRM, AND 14 ) REMANDING THE MATTER PURSUANT TO FRANK BISIGNANO, ) SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) 15 Commissioner of Social Security1, ) ) ORDER DIRECTING ENTRY OF JUDGMENT IN 16 Defendants. ) FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF AND AGAINST ) DEFENDANT 17 ) ) (Docs. 10, 13, 15) 18

19 Isaac St. John seeks judicial review of the decision denying his application for a period of 20 disability and disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, asserting the 21 administrative law judge erred in evaluating the evidence. (Doc. 1; Doc. 10.) The magistrate judge 22 found the ALJ erred in evaluating the medical opinion of Dr. Galli, and the finding that “[the] opinion 23 was not persuasive is not supported by substantial evidence.” (Doc. 15 at 12; see also id. at 6-12.) The 24 magistrate judge found remand was appropriate for the ALJ to reconsider the medical evidence, 25 reassess Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity, “and conduct a new sequential analysis, including a 26 reevaluation of Plaintiff’s symptom claims.” (Id. at 12.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended 27

28 1 Frank Bisignano became the Commissioner of Social Security on May 6, 2025. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the 1 || the Court grant Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and remand the matter for further 2 || proceedings. (/d. at 13.) 3 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on the parties and notified them that an 4 || objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 15 at 14.) The Court advised the parties that the “failure □□ 5 || file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of certain rights on appeal.” □□□□ at 6 || citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Neither party filed objections, a1 7 || the time to do so has passed. 8 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. 9 || Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations are 10 || supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 11 1. The Findings and Recommendations dated September 8, 2025 (Doc. 15) are 12 ADOPTED in full. 13 2. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 10) is GRANTED. 14 3. Defendant’s cross-motion to affirm the administrative decision (Doc. 13) is DENIED. 15 4. The matter is REMANDED for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 16 U.S.C. § 405(g), consistent with the Court’s findings. 17 5. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate pending motions; enter judgment in favor ¢ 18 Plaintiff Isaac St. John and against Defendant Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of 19 Social Security; and to close this case. 20 22 || Dated: _ September 23, 2025 ( Li pA LU. wan 23 TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 24 25 26 27 28