Wolven v. Astrue

Filing 16

ORDER. The Court hereby ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Hummel's 14 Report-Recommendation and Order is ACCEPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein. The Court further ORDERS that Defendant's decision is AFFIRMED. The Court furt her ORDERS that the Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED and the Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED. The Court further ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in favor of the Defendant and close this case. Signed by Senior Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr on 9/25/2014. (dpk)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ________________________________________________ GUENEVIERE WOLVEN also known as Gueneviere Gardner, Plaintiff, v. 1:12-CV-1308 (FJS/CFH) CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ________________________________________________ APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL BINDER AND BINDER 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 520 New York, New York 10165 Attorneys for Plaintiff CHARLES E. BINDER, ESQ. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF REGIONAL GENERAL COUNSEL, REGION II 26 Federal Plaza, Room 3904 New York, New York 10278 JOANNE J. PENGELLY, ESQ. SCULLIN, Senior Judge ORDER Plaintiff commenced this action, seeking judicial review of the Commissioner's final decision. See Dkt. No. 1. Defendant filed her answer and the administrative record on February 7, 2013. See Dkt. Nos. 6-7. Plaintiff filed her motion for judgment on the pleadings on March 25, 2013, see Dkt. No. 9; and Defendant filed her motion for judgment on the pleadings on June 6, 2013, see Dkt. No. 13. On November 12, 2013, Magistrate Judge Hummel issued his ReportRecommendation and Order in which he recommended that this Court deny Plaintiff's judgment on the pleadings and affirm Defendant's final decision. See Dkt. No. 14. Plaintiff filed objections to these recommendations. See Dkt. No. 15. In reviewing a magistrate judge's report-recommendation, the district court may decide to accept, reject or modify the recommendations therein. See 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1). The court conducts a de novo review of the magistrate judge's recommendations to which a party objects. See Pizzaro v. Bartlett, 776 F. Supp. 815, 817 (S.D.N.Y. 1991). "'"If, however, the party makes only conclusory or general objections, or simply reiterates his original arguments, the Court reviews the Report and Recommendation only for clear error."'" Salmini v. Astrue, No. 3:06-CV458, 2009 WL 1794741, *1 (N.D.N.Y. June 23, 2009) (quoting [Farid v. Bouey, 554 F. Supp. 2d 301] at 306 [(N.D.N.Y. 2008)] (quoting McAllan v. Von Essen, 517 F. Supp. 2d 672, 679 (S.D.N.Y. 2007))). Finally, even if the parties file no objections, the court must ensure that the face of the record contains no clear error. See Wilds v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 262 F. Supp. 2d 163, 169 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (quotation omitted). The Court has conducted a de novo review of Magistrate Judge Hummel's November 12, 2013 Report-Recommendation and Order in light of Plaintiff's objections. Having completed that review, the Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Hummel's conclusion that the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") properly evaluated the medical opinion evidence, applied the correct legal standards, and reached a decision that was supported by substantial evidence. In addition, the Court concurs with Magistrate Judge Hummel's finding that the ALJ did not engage in any conduct that would merit a remand. Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Hummel's November 12, 2013 Report-Recommendation and Order is ACCEPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein; and the Court further -2- ORDERS that Defendant's decision is AFFIRMED; and the Court further ORDERS that Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED; and the Court further ORDERS that Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED; and the Court further ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in favor of Defendant and close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 25, 2014 Syracuse, New York -3-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?