Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

SANTANA v. COLVIN, 8:13-cv-1737-T-33AEP. (2014)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20140418d18 Visitors: 7
Filed: Apr. 16, 2014
Latest Update: Apr. 16, 2014
Summary: ORDER VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ CONVINGTON, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli (Doc. # 22), filed on April 9, 2014, recommending that the Commissioner's Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand (Doc. # 21) be granted. As of this date, no objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed, and the time to do so has now passed. 1 After careful consideration, the Co
More

ORDER

VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ CONVINGTON, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli (Doc. # 22), filed on April 9, 2014, recommending that the Commissioner's Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand (Doc. # 21) be granted.

As of this date, no objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed, and the time to do so has now passed.1 After careful consideration, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.

Discussion

After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983).

In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Hous. v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F.Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff'd, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994).

After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings, conclusions, and recommendations, and giving de novo review to matters of law, the Court accepts the factual findings and legal conclusions of the Magistrate Judge, and adopts the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:

(1) The Report and Recommendation of Anthony E. Porcelli, United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 22) is ADOPTED.

(2) The Commissioner's Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand (Doc. # 21) is GRANTED.

(3) The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is REVERSED under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and the case is REMANDED for further administrative proceedings consistent with the reasons stated in the Commissioner's Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand.

(4) The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly, terminate any pending motions, and CLOSE THIS CASE.

DONE and ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. According to the Report and Recommendation, the parties had three (3) days from the date the Report and Recommendation was served on the parties to file and serve written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendation. See (Doc. # 22).
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