Opinion
20-23103-CIV-COOKE/GOODMAN
04-28-2022
MARCO TASSARA, Plaintiff, v. KILOL KIJAKAZI, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
MARCIA G. COOKE, United States District Judge.
THIS MATTER is before me upon the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of the Honorable Jonathan Goodman, U.S. Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 27), regarding the Parties' Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. ECF Nos. 23 and 24.
In his R&R, Judge Goodman recommends that I: 1) grant Plaintiff's Summary Judgment Motion; 2) deny Defendant's Summary Judgment Motion; 3) reverse the ALJ's decision; and 4) and remand this case for further proceedings pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), with instructions to the ALJ to: (a) address the inconsistency between her determination of a marked limitation in interacting with others and her RFC finding permitting frequent interaction with supervisors, coworkers, and the public; (b) further address, if the ALJ so chooses, the symptoms caused by Plaintiff's mental impairments; (c) address, if the ALJ so chooses, the views of the State agency psychological consultants in a hypothetical to the VE or in her substantive discussion; and (d) resolve the three-day versus thirty-day discrepancy in the hearing transcript by either including a substantive discussion or by posing a new hypothetical to the VE.
The parties have not filed Objections to the R&R, and the time to do so has passed. I have reviewed Plaintiff's Motion, the briefing and accompanying exhibits, Judge Goodman's R&R, the record, and the relevant legal authorities. Having done so, I find Judge Goodman's R&R to be clear, cogent, and compelling.
Accordingly, Judge Goodman's R&R (ECF No. 27) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED as the Order of this Court. It is therefore ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: 1) Plaintiff's Summary Judgment Motion is GRANTED; 2) Defendant's Summary Judgment Motion is DENIED; 3) the ALJ's decision is REVERSED; and 4) this matter is REMANDED, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for the ALJ to: (a) address the inconsistency between her determination of a marked limitation in interacting with others and her RFC finding permitting frequent interaction with supervisors, coworkers, and the public; (b) further address, if the ALJ so chooses, the symptoms caused by Plaintiff's mental impairments; (c) address, if the ALJ so chooses, the views of the State agency psychological consultants in a hypothetical to the VE or in her substantive discussion; and (d) resolve the three-day versus thirty-day discrepancy in the hearing transcript by either including a substantive discussion or by posing a new hypothetical to the VE.
DONE and ORDERED.
Jonathan Goodman, U.S. Magistrate Judge.