Miller v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 28

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER for 27 Report and Recommendations. Having reviewed the Report, to which no objection was made, the Court finds no clear error on the face of the record. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report in its entirety as the decision o f the Court. This case is REMANDED to the SSA for further administrative proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. 405(g).The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this order to the pro se Plaintiff and close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 6/19/2013) (rsh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------------X
:
KAREN MILLER,
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
-against:
:
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
:
Defendant. :
:
------------------------------------------------------------- X

6/19/13

12 Civ. 03708 (LGS)
MEMORANDUM AND
ORDER

LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge:
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Maas (Dkt. No.
27) (“Report”), recommending that the Court grant Defendant’s Motion to Remand (Dkt. No. 21)
(“Motion”) and remand this case for further proceedings before the Social Security
Administration (“SSA”).
Plaintiff filed the Complaint in this action on May 9, 2012, (Dkt. No. 2) seeking review
of the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) finding that Plaintiff is
not disabled. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Maas on August 24, 2012. (Dkt. No. 9).
On April 1, 2013, the Commissioner filed the present Motion, requesting that the Court reverse
the decision of the Commissioner and remand to the SSA for further administrative proceedings
pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) because the Administrative Law Judge did
not adequately consider the impact of Plaintiff’s left eye blindness on her ability to perform light
work. Def.’s Mem. of Law in Supp. of Mot. to Dismiss at 1.
On May 30, 2013, Judge Maas issued the Report, recommending that the Court remand
this case for further administrative proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. §
405(g). The Report states that, during a telephone conference held on May 30, 2013, Plaintiff
consented on the record to having the case remanded to the SSA.

A district court reviewing a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation “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)(C). The district court “may adopt those portions of the report to
which no ‘specific, written objection’ is made, as long as the factual and legal bases supporting
the findings and conclusions set forth in those sections are not clearly erroneous or contrary to
law.” Adams v. New York State Dep’t of Educ., 855 F. Supp. 2d 205, 206 (S.D.N.Y. 2012)
(citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149, 106 S. Ct. 466, 88 L. Ed. 2d 435
(1985)).
Having reviewed the Report, to which no objection was made, the Court finds no clear
error on the face of the record. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report in its entirety as the
decision of the Court. This case is REMANDED to the SSA for further administrative
proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this order to the pro se Plaintiff and close this
case.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 19, 2013
New York, New York

2