Summary
holding that the determination that a doctor's opinion was "inconsistent with the extensive activities of daily living what the claimant was able to perform" was conclusory because it "does not identify which activities are being referenced"
Summary of this case from Marshall v. ColvinOpinion
13 Civ. 6233 (LGS)
01-26-2015
JESSICA M. MILLER, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.
ORDER AND OPINION
:
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge James C. Francis ("Report"), recommending that Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings be granted; Defendant's cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings be denied; and the Commissioner's decision denying Plaintiff's application for Supplemental Security Income Benefits and Disability Insurance Benefits ("Decision") be vacated and the case remanded to the Social Security Administration ("SSA") for further proceedings. For the reasons stated below, the Report is adopted in its entirety.
On September 5, 2013, Plaintiff filed the Complaint in this action, seeking judicial review of the Decision, which became final on July 8, 2013. On September 16, 2013, the matter was referred to Judge Francis. On March 31, 2014, Plaintiff moved for judgment on the administrative record and pleadings under Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. On October 14, 2014, Defendant cross-moved for judgment on the pleadings. On December 17, 2014, Judge Francis issued the Report. No objections to the Report were filed.
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). The district court "may adopt those portions of the report to which no specific, written objection is made, as long as the factual and legal bases supporting the findings and conclusions set forth in those sections are not clearly erroneous or contrary to law." Adams v. New York State Dep't of Educ., 855 F. Supp. 2d 205, 206 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (internal quotation marks omitted) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)).
The factual and legal bases underlying the Report are not clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Accordingly, the Report is ADOPTED in its entirety as the decision of the Court. Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED, Defendant's cross-motion is DENIED, the Decision is VACATED and the case is remanded to the SSA for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. SO ORDERED. Dated: January 26, 2015
New York, New York
/s/_________
LORNA G. SCHOFIELD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE