Donnelly v. Colvin

Filing 23

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 22 Report and Recommendations. For the reasons herein, Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED in part, and the case is hereby REMANDED for further administrative proceedings. This resolves Dkt. Nos. 14 and 19. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment and close this case. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 3/31/2015) (kgo)

USDC SONY
DOCUMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC h'
DATE

;:1-L£n:-MAff-:rr=2or

Stacy Donnelly,
Plaintiff,
13-CV-7244 (AJN) (RLE)

-vORDER ADOPTING
REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION

Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of
Social Security,
Defendant

ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge:
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Ronald Ellis's Report and Recommendation
("Report" or "R&R") dated March 13, 2015, Dkt. No. 22, addressing the parties' respective
motions for summary judgment on the pleadings. Judge Ellis recommended that Plaintiffs
motion be granted in part and that the case be remanded for further administrative proceedings.
The Court presumes familiarity with the factual and procedural background of this case as set
forth in Judge Ellis' s Report.
District courts may designate magistrate judges to hear and determine certain dispositive
motions and to submit proposed findings of fact and a recommendation as to those motions. 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Any party wishing to object to a magistrate judge's report and
recommendation must do so within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the report and
recommendation. Id. If a party submits a timely objection to a report and recommendation, the
district court reviews de nova those portions to which the party objected. Id.; see also Norman v.
Astrue, 912 F. Supp. 2d 33, 39 (S.D.N.Y. 2012). Otherwise, "[w]here no 'specific written

objection' is made, the district court may adopt those portions 'as long as the factual and legal
basis supporting the findings and conclusions set forth ... are not clearly erroneous or contrary
to law."' Norman, 912 F. Supp. 2d at 39 (quoting Eisenberg v. New England Motor Freight,
1

Inc., 564 F. Supp. 2d 224, 226-27 (S.D.N.Y. 2008)). Because neither party filed an objection to
Judge Ellis's Report within the requisite fourteen days, the Court reviews his entire Report for
clear error.
Upon review of Judge Ellis's thorough and well-reasoned Report, the Court finds no clear
error. Thus, Judge Ellis's Report is adopted in its entirety as the opinion of the Court. See, e.g.,

Beller v. Astrue, No. 12 CV 5112 (VB), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79541, at *2-3 (S.D.N.Y. June 5,
2013). As stated in Judge Ellis's Report, because the administrative law judge did not consult a
vocational expert in her discussion of jobs in the economy that Plaintiff can perform, remand for
further administrative proceedings is appropriate.
Therefore, Plaintiffs motion is GRANTED in part, and the case is hereby REMANDED
for further administrative proceedings. This resolves Dkt. Nos. 14 and 19. The Clerk of Court is
directed to enter judgment and close this case.
SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 31, 2015
New York, New York

United States District Judge

2