Pickering v. Berryhill, No. 8:2017cv00700 - Document 17 (N.D.N.Y 2018)

Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER accepting and adopting # 16 Magistrate Judge Carter's Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Plaintiff's # 11 motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted in part and denied in part; and Defendant's # 12 Motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted in part and denied in part. Defendant's decision denying Plaintiff disability benefits is VACATED, and this case is REMANDED, pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for proceedings consistent with Magistrate Judge Carter's Report and Recommendation and this Decision and Order. Signed by Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 7/20/18. (lmw)

Download PDF

Pickering v. Berryhill Doc. 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK _____________________________________ KATY P., Plaintiff, v. 8:17-CV-0700 (GTS/WBC) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. _____________________________________ APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: SCHNEIDER & PALCSIK Counsel for Plaintiff 57 Court Street Plattsburgh, NY 12901 MARK A. SCHNEIDER, ESQ. U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMIN. OFFICE OF REG’L GEN. COUNSEL – REGION II Counsel for Defendant 26 Federal Plaza - Room 3904 New York, NY 10278 JASON P. PECK, ESQ. GLENN T. SUDDABY, Chief United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Currently before the Court, in this Social Security action filed by Katy P. (“Plaintiff”) against the Commissioner of Social Security (“Defendant” or “the Commissioner”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge William B. Mitchell Carter, recommending that Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings be granted in part and denied in part and Defendant’s motion for judgement on the pleadings be granted in part and denied in part. (Dkt. No. 16.) Objections to the Report and Recommendation Dockets.Justia.com have not been filed, and the time in which to do so has expired. (Dkt. No. 16, at 17-18; see generally Docket Sheet.) A district court reviewing a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Parties may raise objections to the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation, but they must be “specific written objections,” and must be submitted “[w]ithin 14 days after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2); accord, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). When no objection is made to a report and recommendation, the Court subjects that report and recommendation to only a clearerror review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes: 1983 Addition. When performing a clear-error review, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Id.; see also Batista v. Walker, 94-CV-2826, 1995 WL 453299, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. July 31, 1995) (“I am permitted to adopt those sections of [a magistrate judge’s] report to which no specific objection is made, so long as those sections are not facially erroneous.”) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). After carefully reviewing the relevant papers herein, including Magistrate Judge Carter’s thorough Report and Recommendation, the Court can find no clear error in the Report and Recommendation. Magistrate Judge Carter employed the proper standards, accurately recited the facts, and reasonably applied the law to those facts. (Dkt. No. 16.) ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Carter’s Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 16) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further 2 ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 11) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; and it is further ORDERED that Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 12) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; and it is further ORDERED that Defendant’s decision denying Plaintiff disability benefits is VACATED, and this case is REMANDED, pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for proceedings consistent with Magistrate Judge Carter’s Report and Recommendation and this Decision and Order. Dated: July 20, 2018 Syracuse, New York ____________________________________ Hon. Glenn T. Suddaby Chief U.S. District Judge 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.