Opinion
1:21-cv-20652-KMM
09-09-2022
NORMA VIRGEN ESCALONA, Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration,[1]Defendant.
ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
K.MICHAEL MOORE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the Parties' cross motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff Norma Virgen Escalona (“Plaintiff”) filed the Complaint seeking review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Defendant”). (ECF No. 1). On January 19, 2022, Plaintiff filed her Motion for Summary Judgment. (“Pl.'s Mot.”) (ECF No. 27). On February 18, 2022, Defendant filed his Motion for Summary Judgment with Supporting Memorandum of Law and Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. (“Def.'s Mot.”) (ECF No. 30). The Court referred the matter to the Honorable Lauren Fleischer Louis, United States Magistrate Judge, who issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff's Motion be GRANTED, and Defendant's Motion be DENIED. (“R&R”) (ECF No. 32). The Parties did not file objections to the R&R and the time to do so has passed. The matter is now ripe for review. As set forth below, the Court ADOPTS the R&R.
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); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3).
As set forth in the R&R, Magistrate Judge Louis makes the following findings: (1) the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) erred in according the account and opinions of Plaintiff's treating physician little weight; and (2) the ALJ erred in discounting Plaintiff's own testimony; yet (3) the ALJ's finding that Plaintiff could return to her past relevant work as a small parts assembler was in fact supported by substantial evidence. This Court agrees.
Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the R&R, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the R&R (ECF No. 32) is ADOPTED, Plaintiff's Motion (ECF No. 27) is GRANTED, and Defendant's Motion (ECF No. 30) is DENIED. The Court hereby REVERSES the Administrative Law Judge's decision and REMANDS this cause to the Administrative Law Judge to reanalyze steps four and five of the Social Security Administration's five-step inquiry (including affording proper weight to the treating physician's opinions).