Summary
declining to award benefits when the plaintiff had endured only two remands but filed her claim in 1995
Summary of this case from Holmes v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.Opinion
Case No. 3:15-cv-423-J-34MCR
08-10-2016
SABRINA A. TALLEY, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant.
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Monte C. Richardson's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 23; Report), entered on July 13, 2016. In the Report, Magistrate Judge Richardson recommends that the Commissioner's decision be reversed and remanded. See Report at 13. No objections to the Report have been filed, and the time for doing so has passed.
The Court "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). If no specific objections to findings of facts are filed, the district court is not required to conduct a de novo review of those findings. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, the district court must review legal conclusions de novo. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); United States v. Rice, No. 2:07-mc-8-FtM-29SPC, 2007 WL 1428615, at *1 (M.D. Fla. May 14, 2007).
Upon independent review of the Magistrate Judge's Report, the Court will accept and adopt the legal and factual conclusions recommended by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 23) of Magistrate Judge Richardson is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) REVERSING the Commissioner's final decision and REMANDING this matter to the ALJ with the following instructions:
(a) Consider Plaintiff's right hand impairment and any resulting limitations, as suggested by Dr. Simonds, together with all severe and non-severe impairments, in assessing the RFC;
(b) Attempt to obtain the report of the consultative examination conducted by Dr. Salinas in December 2008;
(c) Reconsider the RFC assessment, if necessary; and
(d) Conduct any further proceedings deemed appropriate.
3. The Clerk of the Court is further directed to close the file.
4. Plaintiff's counsel is advised that, in the event benefits are awarded on remand, any § 406(b) or § 1383(d)(2) fee application shall be filed within the parameters set forth by the Order entered in Case No. 6:12-mc-124-Orl-22 (In Re: Procedures for Applying for Attorney's Fees Under 42 U.S.C. §§ 406(b) and 1383(d)(2)).
DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida, this 10th day of August, 2016.
/s/_________
MARCIA MORALES HOWARD
United States District Judge ja Copies to: Counsel of Record