WINSTON
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
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.
Winston seeks judicial review of the Social Security Administration's denial of her disability and supplemental security income claim. The district court affirms the Commissioner's decision, finding that the ALJ applied correct legal standards and the decision was supported by substantial evidence.
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding that the ALJ applied the correct legal standards and the decision was supported by substantial evidence.
[1] A district court reviews a magistrate judge's report and recommendation de novo in the absence of an objection.
[2] A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation after an independent review of the record.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The ALJ applied the correct legal standards and the ALJ's decision is supported by substantial evidence.”
Establishes the court's finding that the administrative decision met the required legal and evidentiary standards for denial of benefits.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWinston filed a claim for a period of disability, disability insurance benefits, and supplemental security income. The claim was denied by the Commiss…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Action For Judicial Review Of Social Security Administration Decision cases and more on FLexlaw
Before the Court is Plaintiff's complaint seeking judicial review of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration's (“Commissioner") decision denying her claim for a period of disability, disability insurance benefits, and supplemental security income (Dkt. 1). The magistrate judge issued a report recommending that the decision of the Commissioner be affirmed (Dkt. 20). The time for filing objections has passed.
After an independent review of the record, the Court may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Court reviews the legal conclusions de novo in the absence of an objection. See LeCroy v. McNeil, 397 F. App'x 554, 556 (11th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted); Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).
Having conducted an independent review of the record, the Court agrees with Judge Porcelli's thorough and well-reasoned report and recommendation. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) applied the correct legal standards and the ALJ's decision is supported by substantial evidence. It is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1) The report and recommendation (Dkt. 20) is approved, confirmed, and adopted in all respects and is made a part of this order.
2) The Commissioner's decision denying Plaintiff's claim for a period of disability, disability insurance benefits, and supplemental security income is affirmed.
3) The Clerk is directed to enter final judgment in favor of the Commissioner, terminate any pending motions, and close the case.
DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida, on June 25, 2024.
WILLIAM F. JUNG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
COPIES FURNISHED TO: Plaintiff, pro se Counsel of record
2