Ceballos v. Commissioner of Social Security
DECISION and ORDER: ORDERED that, The Commissioner's decision is VACATED; This matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42U.S.C. § 405 (g) for further administrative proceedings consistent with this 15 Report-Recommendation. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 8/26/2015. (mgh)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------TONIE CEBALLOS o/b/o A.R.C.,
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
COUGHLIN & GERHART, LLP
Attorneys for Plaintiff
P.O. Box 2039
Binghamton, NY 13902-2039
SCOT G. MILLER, ESQ.
OFFICE OF REGIONAL GENERAL
Attorneys for Defendant
Social Security Administration
26 Federal Plaza, Room 3904
New York, NY 10278
JOANNE PENGELLY, ESQ.
DAVID N. HURD
United States District Judge
DECISION and ORDER
Plaintiff Tonie Ceballos filed this action on behalf of her minor dependant seeking
judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying her
application for Supplemental Security Income benefits for her child A.R.C. under the Social
Security Act. By Report-Recommendation dated June 8, 2015, the Honorable Thérèse Wiley
Dancks, United States Magistrate Judge, recommended that the matter be remanded to the
Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with the Report-Recommendation. No
objections to the Report-Recommendation were filed.
Based upon a careful review of the entire file and the recommendations of the
Magistrate Judge, the Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C.
Accordingly, it is
1. The Commissioner's decision is VACATED; and
2. This matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42
U.S.C. § 405 (g) for further administrative proceedings consistent with this ReportRecommendation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 26, 2015
Utica, New York.
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?