Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Substantive rulingFiled Jan. 3, 2025

Petina K. v. Colvin

Judge
Laura Provinzino
Docket
0:23-cv-03086
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Petina K. v. Colvin, Judge Provinzino reversed the benefits denial and remanded for further consideration of two doctors’ opinions.

Who this affects

Petina K.’s disability-benefits claim was sent back to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings. The order reversed the Commissioner’s decision but does not state that Petina K. was awarded benefits.

What happened

In Petina K. v. Colvin, Petina K. challenged the Social Security Administration’s denial of her application for disability benefits.

Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty recommended reversing the Commissioner’s decision and sending the matter back for additional consideration of the persuasiveness of Dr. Karayusuf’s and Dr. Sperr’s medical opinions. Neither party objected.

Judge Laura M. Provinzino found no clear error, adopted the recommendation in full, granted Petina K.’s requested relief, denied the Commissioner’s requested relief, reversed the final decision, and remanded the matter to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Petina K. v. Colvin · No. 0:23-cv-03086
Judge
Laura M. Provinzino
Date
Jan. 3, 2025

Background

Petina K. appealed the denial of her application for disability benefits by Carolyn W. Colvin, the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. The court substituted Colvin as the defendant in her official capacity after she became Acting Commissioner on November 30, 2024.

Report and Recommendation

After receiving briefs from both sides, United States Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued a Report and Recommendation. He recommended that the court reverse the Commissioner’s decision denying benefits and remand the matter to the Social Security Administration for additional consideration and explanation of how persuasive the Commissioner found the medical opinions of Dr. Karayusuf and Dr. Sperr.

Neither party objected to the recommendation. Because there were no objections, the court reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the recommendation.

Ruling

Judge Laura M. Provinzino found no clear error and adopted the Report and Recommendation in full. The court granted the relief requested in Petina K.’s brief, denied the relief requested in the Commissioner’s brief, reversed the Commissioner’s final decision, and remanded the matter to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings consistent with the recommendation. The order does not state that benefits were awarded.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.