Wagner v. Colvin

Filing 21

-CLERK TO FOLLOW UP- DECISION AND ORDER denying 16 Government's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; granting 18 Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings to the extent that this matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this order and with the R&R; adopting Report and Recommendations re 20 Report and Recommendations. (Clerk to close case.) Signed by Hon. Michael A. Telesca on 4/20/16. (JMC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

RALPH EDWARD WAGNER,
Plaintiff,
-vs-

No. 1:13-CV-00346 (MAT)
DECISION AND ORDER

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

Represented by counsel, Ralph Edward Wagner (“plaintiff”)
brings this action pursuant to Title XVI of the Social Security Act
(“the

Act”),

seeking

review

of

the

final

decision

of

the

Commissioner of Social Security (“the Commissioner”) denying his
application for supplemental security income (“SSI”). The Court has
jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The
matter was initially before the Court on the parties’ cross motions
for judgment on the pleadings.1 The parties’ motions were referred
to Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J. McCarthy for consideration of the
factual and legal issues presented, and to prepare and file a
Report

and

Recommendation

(“R&R”)

containing

a

recommended

disposition of the issues raised.
By

R&R

dated

March

22,

2016,

Magistrate

Judge

McCarthy

recommended that the case be remanded for further consideration,
including further development of the administrative record, as

1

This case was originally assigned to Judge Richard Arcara, who referred
it to Magistrate Judge McCarthy for a Report and Recommendation, which was
completed and filed on March 22, 2016. Doc. 20. The case was referred to this
Court by order dated March 16, 2016. Doc. 19.

described therein. Doc. 20. Both parties were notified that they
were given 14 days within which to file objections; however,
neither party has filed an objection.
Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy
of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, the party “may
serve

and

file

specific,

written

objections

to

the

proposed

findings and recommendations.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). “If no
objections are made, . . . a district court need review. . . a
report-recommendation only for clear error.” Breinin v. Colvin,
2015 WL 7738047, *1 (N.D.N.Y. Dec. 1, 2015). “A [district] judge .
. . may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the
findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” Id.
(quoting 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)).
No objections having been filed, the Court has accordingly
reviewed the R&R for clear error and finds none. Accordingly, the
R&R

(Doc.

20)

is

approved

and

adopted

in

its

entirety.

The

Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Doc. 16) is
denied, and plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings
(Doc. 18) is granted to the extent that this matter is remanded for
further proceedings consistent with this order and with the R&R.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.
ALL OF THE ABOVE IS SO ORDERED.

S/Michael A. Telesca
HON. MICHAEL A. TELESCA
United States District Judge
Dated:

April 20, 2016
Rochester, New York.