Griffin
v.
Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

This case is not covered by Casetext's citator
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISIONJul 9, 2018
Case No: 2:17-cv-280-FtM-39CM (M.D. Fla. Jul. 9, 2018)

Case No: 2:17-cv-280-FtM-39CM

07-09-2018

EDWARD GRIFFIN, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.


OPINION AND ORDER

Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court. --------

This matter comes before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Carol MIrando's Report and Recommendation filed on June 20, 2018. (Doc. 20). Judge Mirando recommends that the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security be reversed and remanded under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The parties have not objected to the Report and Recommendation, and the time to do so has elapsed. This matter is ripe for review.

After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982). Absent specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even absent an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).

After independently examining the file and on consideration of Judge Mirando's findings and recommendation, the Court accepts and adopts the Report and Recommendation.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

(1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 20) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED and the findings incorporated herein.
(2) The Commissioner's decision is REVERSED, and this matter is REMANDED for rehearing under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), with instructions to the Administrative Law Judge to:

a. Determine whether there is other work available in significant numbers that Plaintiff can perform given his Residual Functional Capacity, which may require additional testimony from a vocational expert;
b. Conduct any further proceedings deemed appropriate.


(3) The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly, terminate any pending motions, and close this case.


DONE
and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 9th day of July, 2018.

/s/ _________


SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL


UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies: All Parties of Record