Opinion
1:21-cv-20216-GAYLES/TORRES
09-21-2022
JOSUE REQUE, Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant.
ORDER
DARRIN P. GAYLES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Chief Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres's Report and Recommendation (the “Report”), [ECF No. 29], regarding the parties' cross motions for summary judgement filed by Plaintiff Josue Reque and Defendant Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. [ECF No. 20]; [ECF No. 24]. On January 19, 2021, the Court referred this case to Judge Torres, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), for a ruling on all pre-trial, non-dispositive matters and a report and recommendation on all dispositive matters. [ECF No. 2]. On September 12, 2022, Judge Torres issued his Report recommending that Plaintiff's motion for summary judgement, [ECF No. 20], be granted and that Defendant's motion for summary judgement, [ECF No. 24], be denied, and that the decision of the Administrative Law Judge should be remanded. No objections were filed by either party.
A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objections are made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objections are made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F.Supp.2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 Fed.Appx. 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006).
Having reviewed the Report for clear error, the Court agrees with Judge Torres's well-reasoned analysis and conclusion. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. Chief Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres's Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 29], is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference.
2. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgement, [ECF No. 20], is GRANTED.
3. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgement, [ECF No. 24], is DENIED.
4. This matter shall be remanded to the Administrative Law Judge for further proceedings.
DONE AND ORDERED.