Nelson v. Commissioner of Social Security

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

SHANTAE L. N.,

Plaintiff, 6:24-cv-839 (BKS/TWD)

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant.

Appearances: For Plaintiff: Howard D. Olinsky Olinsky Law Group 250 South Clinton Street - Suite 210 Syracuse, NY 13202

For Defendant: Candace Brown Casey Special Assistant United States Attorney Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 6401 Security Boulevard Baltimore, MD 21235 Hon. Brenda K. Sannes, Chief United States District Judge: MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) seeking review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her application for Social Security disability insurance and supplemental security income benefits. (Dkt. No. 1). This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Thérèse Wiley Dancks for a Report-Recommendation. (Dkt. No. 5); Local Rule 72.3(e). On September 10, 2025, after reviewing the parties’ briefs, (Dkt. Nos. 9, 13, 16), and the Administrative Transcript, (Dkt. No. 8), Magistrate Judge Dancks issued a Report- Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings be granted, that Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings be denied, and that the Commissioner’s determination be reversed and remanded, (Dkt. No. 17). Magistrate Judge Dancks advised the parties that under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), they had “fourteen days within

which to file written objections” to the Report-Recommendation and that “failure to object to th[e] report within fourteen days will preclude appellate review.” (Dkt. No. 17, at 17 (citing Roldan v. Racette, 984 F.2d 85 (2d Cir. 1993)); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. No objections were filed. The Court reviews de novo those portions of the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations that have been properly preserved with a specific objection. Petersen v. Astrue, 2 F. Supp. 3d 223, 228–29 (N.D.N.Y. 2012); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Findings and recommendations as to which there was no properly preserved objection are reviewed for clear error. Id. Neither of the parties has raised any objection to Magistrate Judge Dancks’s Report- Recommendation. The Court has reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear error and

found none. For these reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Dancks’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 17) is ADOPTED in all respects; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 9) is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED that Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 13) is DENIED and the Commissioner’s determination is REVERSED and the matter is remanded for further administrative proceedings; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 25, 2025 Syracuse, New York enn C Ce rs Bo Brenda K. Sannes Chief U.S. District Judge