Moore v. Commissioner of Social Security

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK _______________________________________________ RUTH M., Plaintiff, v. 5:18-CV-1006 (FJS/CFH) ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. _______________________________________________ APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL LAW OFFICES OF STEVEN R. DOLSON STEVEN R. DOLSON, ESQ. 126 North Salina Street, Suite 3B Syracuse, New York 13202 Attorneys for Plaintiff SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION HEATHER SERTIAL, ESQ. OFFICE OF REGIONAL GENERAL COUNSEL - REGION II 26 Federal Plaza, Room 3904 New York, New York 10278 Attorneys for Defendant SCULLIN, Senior Judge ORDER On May 4, 2015, Plaintiff filed a Title II application for disability insurance benefits and a Title XVI application for SSI benefits. See Dkt. No. 10-1, Administrative Record at 202-211. In both applications, Plaintiff alleged a disability onset date of September 1, 2005. See id. at 202. The Commissioner initially denied the applications on July 20, 2015. See id. at 128. Plaintiff requested a hearing, which was held on June 22, 2017, before Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") Gretchen Mary Greisler. See id. at 1057-1094. At the hearing, Plaintiff amended her alleged disability onset date to March 31, 2015. See id. at 1060. On August 2, 2017, the ALJ issued a decision denying Plaintiff's applications for benefits. The ALJ's decision became the Commissioner's final decision when the Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's request for review on July 27, 2018. See id. at 1-7. Plaintiff commenced this action on August 22, 2018. See Dkt. No. 1, Complaint. Defendant filed

his answer on December 20, 2018. See Dkt. No. 10. Plaintiff filed her brief on February 4, 2019, see Dkt. No. 11; and Defendant filed his brief on March 18, 2019, see Dkt. No. 13. On February 19, 2020, Magistrate Judge Hummel filed his Report-Recommendation and Order, in which he recommended that this Court reverse the Commissioner's decision and remand this case "for further administrative proceedings, during which the record can be appropriately developed, potentially including obtaining updated medical assessments of [P]laintiff[.]" See Dkt. No. 14 at 24. The parties did not file any objections to these recommendations.

When a party does not object to a magistrate judge's report-recommendation, the court reviews that report-recommendation for clear error or manifest injustice. See Linares v. Mahunik, No. 9:05-CV-625, 2009 WL 3165660, *10 (N.D.N.Y. July 16, 2009) (citation and footnote omitted). After conducting this review, "the Court may 'accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the . . . recommendations made by the magistrate judge.'" Id. (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)). The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Hummel's February 19, 2020 Report- Recommendation for clear error and manifest injustice; and, finding none, the Court hereby

ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Hummel's February 19, 2020 Report-Recommendation is ACCEPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein; and the Court further ORDERS that the Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and this case is REMANDED -2- pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative proceedings, during which the record can be appropriately developed, potentially including obtaining updated medical assessments of Plaintiff; and the Court further ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 16, 2020 Syracuse, New York

Freder& f J Jr. Senior United States District Judge

-3-