CASTRENZE
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

M.D. Fla. | 2024-08-16
No. 8:23-cv-1246
2024 FFL 18978 District Court, M.D. Florida (2024)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court accepted the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation, denying the plaintiff's motion to remand and affirming the Commissioner's decision to deny benefits.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff sought to remand his Social Security benefits denial under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The Magistrate Judge recommended denying the motion and affir…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court

This matter comes before the Court upon consideration of United States Magistrate Judge Patricia D. Barksdale's Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 28), entered on August 1, 2024, recommending that the motion to remand under the sixth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (Doc. # 25) be denied and the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying benefits be affirmed.

As of this date, neither party has filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation, and the time for the parties to file such objections has elapsed.

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). 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 recommendation. 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-Houston 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.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:

(1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 28) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED.

(2) Plaintiff Daniel Castrenze’s motion to remand under the sixth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (Doc. # 25) is DENIED.

(3) The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is AFFIRMED.

(4) The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and, thereafter, CLOSE this case.

DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 16th day of August, 2024.

Kingizi M. Holy Co VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ COVINGTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw