Perez v. O'Malley
- Analisa Torres
- 1:24-cv-03744
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Perez v. O'Malley, Judge Torres adopted the recommendation and granted the Commissioner judgment on the pleadings in the Social Security benefits case.
Justina Valerio Perez and the Commissioner of Social Security; the ruling ended Perez’s court action seeking review of the benefits denial.
What happened
Justina Valerio Perez asked the Southern District of New York to review the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision denying her disability insurance and supplemental security income benefits in Perez v. O'Malley. A magistrate judge recommended granting the Commissioner judgment on the pleadings, a decision based on the written court record without a trial.
No one objected to the recommendation before the deadline. The court therefore reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake.
Judge Analisa Torres found no clear error, adopted the recommendation in full, and granted the Commissioner judgment on the pleadings. The court directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
The detailed version
- Perez v. O'Malley · No. 1:24-cv-03744
- Analisa Torres
- Jan. 21, 2025
Background
Justina Valerio Perez filed an action seeking judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision denying her disability insurance and supplemental security income benefits. In December 2024, Magistrate Judge Gary R. Jones issued a report and recommendation advising the Court to grant the defendant judgment on the pleadings.
Review of the Recommendation
Perez was notified that she could object to the report and recommendation, but no objections were filed before the deadline. Judge Torres therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error, which means an obvious mistake apparent from the record. The court found no clear error in Judge Jones’s report.
Ruling
Judge Torres adopted the report and recommendation in its entirety and granted the defendant judgment on the pleadings. The court directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The opinion does not separately describe the reasoning supporting the underlying benefits decision; it states that the court found no clear error in the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.