Talley v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 24

ORDER adopting 23 Report and Recommendation. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment reversing and remanding this matter with instructions. The Clerk of the Court is further directed to close the file. Signed by Judge Marcia Morales Howard on 8/10/2016. (JW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

SABRINA A. TALLEY,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No. 3:15-cv-423-J-34MCR

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting
Commissioner of the Social Security
Administration,
Defendant.
_________________________________/

ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Monte C. Richardson’s Report
and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 23; Report), entered on July 13, 2016. In the Report,
Magistrate Judge Richardson recommends that the Commissioner’s decision be reversed
and remanded. See Report at 13. No objections to the Report have been filed, and the time
for doing so has passed.
The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). If no specific
objections to findings of facts are filed, the district court is not required to conduct a de novo
review of those findings. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993);
see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, the district court must review legal conclusions
de novo. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994);

United States v. Rice, No. 2:07-mc-8-FtM-29SPC, 2007 WL 1428615, at *1 (M.D. Fla. May
14, 2007).
Upon independent review of the Magistrate Judge’s Report, the Court will accept and
adopt the legal and factual conclusions recommended by the Magistrate Judge.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED:
1.

The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 23) of Magistrate Judge

Richardson is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
2.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment pursuant to sentence four

of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) REVERSING the Commissioner’s final decision and REMANDING this
matter to the ALJ with the following instructions:
(a)

Consider Plaintiff’s right hand impairment and any resulting limitations,
as suggested by Dr. Simonds, together with all severe and non-severe
impairments, in assessing the RFC;

(b)

Attempt to obtain the report of the consultative examination conducted
by Dr. Salinas in December 2008;

(c)

Reconsider the RFC assessment, if necessary; and

(d)

Conduct any further proceedings deemed appropriate.

3.

The Clerk of the Court is further directed to close the file.

4.

Plaintiff’s counsel is advised that, in the event benefits are awarded on

remand, any § 406(b) or § 1383(d)(2) fee application shall be filed within the parameters set

-2-

forth by the Order entered in Case No. 6:12-mc-124-Orl-22 (In Re: Procedures for Applying
for Attorney’s Fees Under 42 U.S.C. §§ 406(b) and 1383(d)(2)).
DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida, this 10th day of August, 2016.

ja
Copies to:
Counsel of Record

-3-