Birne v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 20

ORDER accepting and adopting the Report and Recommendation 18 and the findings incorporated herein. The Commissioner's decision is REVERSED, and this matter is REMANDED for rehearing under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), with ins tructions to the Administrative Law Judge to: a. Re-evaluate Plaintiff's RFC in light of all of her alleged impairments singularly and in combination; b.Re-evaluate whether there are jobs available in significant numbers that Plaintiff can perfo rm given her RFC, which may require additional testimony from a vocational expert; c.Conduct any further proceedings deemed appropriate. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly, terminate any pending motions, and close this case.Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 7/30/2018. (LMF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
SANDI BIRNE,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 2:17-cv-400-FtM-38CM

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.
/
OPINION AND ORDER1
This matter comes before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Carol
MIrando’s Report and Recommendation filed on July 12, 2018. (Doc. 18). Judge Mirando
recommends that the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security be reversed
and remanded under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The parties have not objected to the Report
and Recommendation, and the time to do so has elapsed. This matter is ripe for review.
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and
recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge's
report and recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Williams v. Wainwright,
681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982). Absent specific objections, there is no requirement that a
district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9

1

Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites.
These hyperlinks are provided only for users’ convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked
documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this
Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or
products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these
third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or
functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to
some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court.

(11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the
findings and recommendations, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal
conclusions de novo, even absent an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry.
Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).
After independently examining the file and on consideration of Judge Mirando’s
findings and recommendation, the Court accepts and adopts the Report and
Recommendation.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
(1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 18) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED
and the findings incorporated herein.
(2) The Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED, and this matter is REMANDED
for rehearing under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), with instructions to the
Administrative Law Judge to:
a. Re-evaluate Plaintiff’s RFC in light of all of her alleged impairments
singularly and in combination;
b. Re-evaluate whether there are jobs available in significant numbers that
Plaintiff can perform given her RFC, which may require additional
testimony from a vocational expert;
c. Conduct any further proceedings deemed appropriate.
(3) The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly, terminate any
pending motions, and close this case.

2

DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 30th day of July, 2018.

Copies: All Parties of Record

3