SIMMONS
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.
The Commissioner's decision was reversed and remanded for the Administrative Law Judge to further evaluate medical opinion evidence from Dr. Freedman and Dr. Kasprzak, focusing on supportability and consistency factors.
[1] In reviewing a magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which no party has objected, a district court must review legal conclusions de novo even without objection,…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSherolyn Simmons appealed the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of benefits. The Magistrate Judge recommended granting the Commissioner's unopp…
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 Remand For Further Administrative Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
The Magistrate Judge has entered a Report and Recommendation, recommending that the Commissioner of Social Security’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand (Doc. 15) be granted. (Doc. 16.) No party has objected and the time to do so has expired. A district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In the absence of objections, a district judge is not required to review the factual findings in the report de novo, but legal conclusions are reviewed de novo even without an objection. Id.; Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F. 2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993). After an independent review of the record, and noting the lack of any objection, the Court agrees with the well reasoned Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, itis ORDERED: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 16) is ADOPTED and made a part of this Order for all purposes. 2. The Commissioner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand (Doc. 15) is GRANTED. 3. The decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and this case is REMANDED under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative action and proceedings as follows: Upon remand, the Appeals Council will remand the case to an Administrative Law Judge with instructions to further evaluate the medical evidence of record, particularly the medical opinion evidence from Dr. Freedman and Dr. Kasprzak, focusing on the factors of supportability and consistency with the record, and issue a new decision. 4. Plaintiff is instructed that any application for fees, costs, or expenses must comply with the Court’s Standing Order on Management of Social Security Cases, In re Administrative Orders of the Chief Judge, No. 3:21-me-1-TJC, Doc. 43 (Dec. 7, 2021). 5. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly, terminate any pending motions and deadlines, and close the file. ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, on April 4, 2022. iy af kf £9 . Ped bluoblhreL1