Summary
In Fuller, this Court found it was error for the ALJ to rely on a lack of objective medical evidence alone when the claimant suffered from fibromyalgia and remanded for proper review of a treating physician's opinion in light of the claimant's fibromyalgia condition.
Summary of this case from Tamara B. v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.Opinion
5:14-CV-0472 (GTS/TWD)
09-16-2015
VIRGINIA DAUSMAN FULLER, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.
APPEARANCES: OLINSKY LAW GROUP Counsel for Plaintiff 300 South State Street, Suite 420 Syracuse, New York 13202 SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF REG'L GEN. COUNSEL-REGION II Counsel for Defendant 26 Federal Plaza, Room 3904 New York, New York 10278 OF COUNSEL: HOWARD D. OLINSKY, ESQ. DENNIS J. CANNING, ESQ. MONIKA K. CRAWFORD, ESQ.
APPEARANCES: OLINSKY LAW GROUP
Counsel for Plaintiff
300 South State Street, Suite 420
Syracuse, New York 13202
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF REG'L GEN. COUNSEL-REGION II
Counsel for Defendant
26 Federal Plaza, Room 3904
New York, New York 10278
OF COUNSEL: HOWARD D. OLINSKY, ESQ. DENNIS J. CANNING, ESQ.
MONIKA K. CRAWFORD, ESQ.
GLENN T. SUDDABY, United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER
The above-captioned matter comes to this Court following a Report-Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Thérèse Wiley Dancks, filed on August 11, 2015, recommending that Defendant's decision denying Plaintiff's application for disability benefits be reversed, and the case be remanded to Defendant for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Dkt. No. 22.) No objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed and the time in which to do so has expired. (See generally Docket Sheet.) After carefully reviewing all of the papers herein, including Magistrate Judge Dancks' thorough Report- Recommendation, the Court can find no clear error in the Report-Recommendation. As a result, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in its entirety; and the case is remanded to Defendant for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
When no objection is made to a report-recommendation, the Court subjects that report-recommendation to only a clear error review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes: 1983 Addition. When performing such 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) (Sotomayor, J.) ("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). --------
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Dancks' Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 22) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that Defendant's decision denying Plaintiff's application for disability benefits is REVERSED ; and it is further
ORDERED that this matter is REMANDED to Defendant for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Dated: September 16, 2015
Syracuse, New York
/s/_________
Hon. Glenn T. Suddaby
Chief, U.S. District Judge