Pagan v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 14

DECISION AND ORDER granting 8 Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; denying 10 Commissioner's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; adopting Report and Recommendations in its entirety re 12 Report and Recommendations. This matter is remanded to tbe Commissioner solely for the calculation and payment of benefits. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.. Signed by Hon. Michael A. Telesca on 6/29/17. (JMC)-CLERK TO FOLLOW UP-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

NORMAN PAGAN,
Plaintiff,
-vs-

No. 1:14-CV-00788 (MAT)
DECISION AND ORDER

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

Represented by counsel, Norman Pagan (“plaintiff”) brings this
action pursuant to Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act
(“the

Act”),

seeking

review

of

the

final

decision

of

the

Commissioner of Social Security (“the Commissioner”) denying his
applications

for

disability

insurance

benefits

(“DIB”)

and

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 Leslie G. Foschio 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 June 8, 2017, Judge Foschio recommended that the
case

be

remanded

solely

for

the

calculation

and

payment

of

benefits, for the reasons described therein. Doc. 12. Both parties

1

This case was originally assigned to Judge Richard Arcara, who referred
it to Magistrate Judge Foschio for a Report and Recommendation, which was
completed and filed on May 25, 2017. Doc. 12. The case was referred to this Court
by order dated June 8, 2017. Doc. 13.

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.

12)

is

approved

and

adopted

in

its

entirety.

The

Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (doc. 10) is
denied, and plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings
(Doc. 8) is granted. This matter is remanded solely for the
calculation and payment of benefits. 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:

June 29, 2017
Rochester, New York.