Karboski v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 14

ORDER: The Report and Recommendation 13 is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying benefits is REVERSED and REMANDED for further administrative proceedings. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) as this is a sentence four remand, and thereafter to CLOSE the CASE. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 7/16/2013. (KAK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
JEFFREY KARBOSKI,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No.

8:12-cv-2033-T-33EAJ

CAROLYN COLVIN,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
_________________________________/
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on consideration of
United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Jenkins’s Report
and Recommendation (Doc. # 13), filed on June 26, 2013,
recommending that the decision of the Commissioner of Social
Security denying Social Security benefits be reversed and
remanded for further administrative proceedings.

As of this

date, neither party has filed an objection to the report and
recommendation, and the time for the parties to file such
objections has elapsed.
After conducting a careful and complete review of the
findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept,
reject

or

modify

recommendation.

the
28

magistrate

U.S.C.

§

judge’s

636(b)(1);

report

and

Williams

v.

Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459
U.S. 1112 (1983).

In the absence of 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 (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 in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston
v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro
Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla.
1993), aff’d, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994) (Table).
After conducting a careful and complete review of the
findings, conclusions and recommendations, and giving de novo
review to matters of law, the Court accepts the factual
findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge, and
the recommendation of the magistrate judge.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
(1)

The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 13) is ACCEPTED and
ADOPTED.

(2)

The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security
denying benefits is REVERSED and REMANDED for further
administrative proceedings.

2

(3)

The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of
Plaintiff pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) as this is a
sentence four remand, and thereafter to CLOSE the CASE.

(4)

The

final

judgment

shall

state

that

if

Plaintiff

ultimately prevails in this case upon remand to the
Social Security Administration, any motion for attorneys’
fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) must be filed no later than
30 days after the date of the Social Security letter sent
to the plaintiff’s counsel of record at the conclusion of
the Agency’s past due benefit calculation stating the
amount withheld for attorney fees. See In re Procedures
for Applying for Attorney Fees under 42 U.S.C. §§ 406(b)
and 1383(d)(2), No. 6:12-mc-124-CRL-22 (M.D. Fla. Nov.
13, 2012).
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this
16th day of July, 2013.

Copies to: counsel of record

3