Opinion
2:20-cv-925-JLB-MRM
01-03-2022
STEVE J. WATTECAMPS, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.
ORDER
JOHN L. BADALAMENTI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On December 16, 2021, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), recommending that the final decision of the Commissioner denying Plaintiff's claim for supplemental security income be reversed and this case remanded under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Doc. 21.) Neither party has objected and the time to do so has expired.
A district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In the absence of objections, a district judge is not required to review the factual findings in a report de novo, but legal conclusions are reviewed de novo even without an objection. Id.; Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993).
After an independent review of the record, and noting that neither party has objected, the Court agrees with the well-reasoned R&R.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 21) is ADOPTED, the Commissioner's decision is REVERSED, and this case is REMANDED for further consideration pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
2. On remand, the Commissioner is instructed to:
(1) Review the entire medical evidence of record; (2) reevaluate Plaintiffs left knee impairment; and (3) properly assess Dr. Morris's, Dr. Walker's, and Dr. Krishnamurthy's medical opinions.
3. Plaintiff is instructed that any application for fees, costs, or expenses must comply with the Court's standing Order on Management of Social Security Cases, In re Administrative Orders of the Chief Judge, Case No. 3:21-mc-1-TJC, Doc. 43 (Dec. 7, 2021).
4. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly, terminate any pending motions and deadlines, and close the file.
ORDERED.