Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

STILL v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 6:14-cv-220-Orl-41KRS. (2015)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20150123b33 Visitors: 8
Filed: Jan. 22, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 22, 2015
Summary: ORDER CARLOS E. MENDOZA, District Judge. THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 1), filed on February 10, 2014, seeking judicial review of a final decision by the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying Plaintiff's claim for Supplemental Security Income for the Aged, Blind, and Disabled Program ("SSI"), 42 U.S.C. 1381 et seq. The United States Magistrate Judge Karla R. Spaulding filed a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 19) on December 17, 2014, rec
More

ORDER

CARLOS E. MENDOZA, District Judge.

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 1), filed on February 10, 2014, seeking judicial review of a final decision by the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying Plaintiff's claim for Supplemental Security Income for the Aged, Blind, and Disabled Program ("SSI"), 42 U.S.C. § 1381 et seq.

The United States Magistrate Judge Karla R. Spaulding filed a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 19) on December 17, 2014, recommending that the Commissioner's final decision be reversed and remanded on each of two assignments of error asserted by Plaintiff.

Defendant filed Defendant's Objections to the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. 20) on December 31, 2014. Plaintiff responded by filing Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Objections (Doc. 21) on January 9, 2015.

After an independent de novo review of the record, this Court agrees entirely with the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Report and Recommendation. Notably, Defendant articulates opposition to the Magistrate's findings on each of the two assignments of error by incorporating arguments previously submitted in a Joint Memorandum (Doc. 18) filed on September 16, 2014. Those arguments were considered by the Magistrate prior to the issuance of the Report and Recommendation and by the undersigned in conducting the required de novo review of the record.

Therefore, it is ORDERED as follows:

1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 19) filed on December 17, 2014, is ADOPTED and CONFIRMED and made a part of this Order. 2. The Commissioner's final decision in this case is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation. 3. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the case.

DONE and ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer