Ward v. Colvin

Filing 20

DECISION AND ORDER accepting and adopting # 19 Magistrate Judge Carter's Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 11 ) is granted in part, and Defendant's motion for judg ment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 16 ) is denied in part. The Commissioner's decision denying Plaintiff social security benefits is reversed and remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g). Signed by Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 1/16/18. (lmw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
_______________________________________________
HARLAN GENE WARD,
Plaintiff,

5:16-CV-1038
(GTS/WBC)

v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
_______________________________________________
APPEARANCES:

OF COUNSEL:

LEGAL SERVICES OF CENTRAL NEW YORK
Counsel for Plaintiff
221 South Warren Street, Suite 300
Syracuse, NY 13202

CHRISTOPHER CADIN, ESQ.

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF REG’L GEN. COUNSEL–REGION II
Counsel for Defendant
26 Federal Plaza, Room 3904
New York, NY 10278

MICHELLE L. CHRIST, ESQ.
Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

GLENN T. SUDDABY, United States District Judge
DECISION and ORDER
The above-captioned matter comes to this Court following a Report-Recommendation by
United States Magistrate Judge William B. Mitchell Carter, filed on November 16, 2017,
recommending that Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings be granted in part,
Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings be denied in part, the Commissioner’s
decision denying Plaintiff Social Security benefits be reversed, and this matter be remanded to
the Commissioner of Social Security pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Dkt. No.
19.) Objections to the Report-Recommendation have not been filed and the time in which to do
so has expired. (See generally Docket Sheet.)

After carefully reviewing all of the papers herein, including Magistrate Judge Carter’s
thorough Report-Recommendation, the Court can find no clear error in the ReportRecommendation:1 Magistrate Judge Carter employed the proper legal standards, accurately
recited the facts, and correctly applied t he law to those facts. (Dkt. No. 19.) As a result, the
Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in its entirety; Plaintiff’s motion for judgment
on the pleadings is granted in part; Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied
in part; the Commissioner’s decision denying Plaintiff Social Security benefits is reversed; and
this matter is remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings pursuant
to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Carter’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 19) is
ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 11) is
GRANTED in part, Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 16) is
DENIED in part, the Commissioner’s decision denying Plaintiff Social Security benefits is

1

When no objection is made to a report-recommendation, the Court subjects that
report-recommendation to only a clear error review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee
Notes: 1983 Addition. When performing such a “clear error” review, “the court need only
satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the
recommendation.” Id.; see also Batista v. Walker, 94-CV-2826, 1995 WL 453299, at *1
(S.D.N.Y. July 31, 1995) (Sotomayor, J.) (“I am permitted to adopt those sections of [a
magistrate judge’s] report to which no specific objection is made, so long as those sections are
not facially erroneous.”) (internal quotation marks omitted).
2

REVERSED, and this matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security for
further proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
Dated: January 16, 2018
Syracuse, New York
____________________________________
HON. GLENN T. SUDDABY
Chief United States District Judge

3