Horne v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 24

ORDER adopting 23 Report and Recommendation. The Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). If Plaintiff prevails on remand, she must comply with the November 14, 2012 order (Doc. 1) in Case Number 6:12-mc-Orl-22. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly, terminate any pending deadlines and motions, and close the file. See Order for details. Signed by Judge John L. Badalamenti on 7/16/2021. (NM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
ANN F. HORNE,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 2:20-cv-181-JLB-MRM

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
ORDER
On June 28, 2021, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation
(“R&R”), recommending that the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision denying
Plaintiff’s claim for supplemental security income be reversed and remanded under
section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Doc. 23.)
Specifically, the Magistrate Judge found that the Administrative Law Judge “failed
to discharge his duty to resolve an apparent conflict between the” Vocational
Expert’s testimony and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles. (Id. at 29–35.) No
objections have been filed and the time to do so has expired.
A district judge may accept, reject, or modify the Magistrate Judge’s R&R.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The factual findings in the R&R need not be reviewed de
novo in the absence of an objection, but legal conclusions are always reviewed de
novo. Id.; Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994);
Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993).

After an independent review of the record, and noting that no objections have
been filed, the Court agrees with the well-reasoned R&R.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED:
1.

The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 23) is ADOPTED for all
purposes.

2.

The Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED and REMANDED
pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On remand, the
Commissioner is instructed to:
Re-evaluate whether work exists in significant numbers
that Plaintiff can perform in light of her RFC, specifically
identifying and resolving any apparent conflicts between
the testimony of the VE and the DOT.

3.

If Plaintiff prevails on remand, she must comply with the
November 14, 2012 order (Doc. 1) in Case Number 6:12-mcOrl-22.

4.

The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment
accordingly, terminate any pending deadlines and motions,
and close the file.

ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, on July 16, 2021.

-2-