Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Substantive rulingFiled Jan. 27, 2025

Gregory F. v. King

Judge
Laura Provinzino
Docket
0:23-cv-03787
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Gregory F. v. King, Judge Provinzino remanded the Social Security case for further proceedings, adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation.

Who this affects

Gregory F. and the Social Security Administration are directly affected. The case returns to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings.

What happened

Gregory F. v. King concerned a request for relief involving the Social Security Administration. Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois recommended sending the case back to the agency for further proceedings.

The court said remand was especially appropriate because a new and severe impairment arose after the state agency consultant gave an opinion, and the Administrative Law Judge discounted the only medical opinion addressing that impairment. No objections were filed, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.

Judge Laura M. Provinzino adopted the recommendation, granted Gregory F.’s request for relief in part and denied it in part, denied the defendant’s request for relief, and remanded the case to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings.

The detailed version

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

Case
Gregory F. v. King · No. 0:23-cv-03787
Judge
Laura M. Provinzino
Date
Jan. 27, 2025

Background

The court considered a report and recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois. The recommendation advised remanding Gregory F.’s case to the Social Security Administration for additional proceedings. The opinion identifies Michelle King as the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration.

Reason for Remand

The court stated that remand was particularly appropriate because an entirely new and severe impairment arose after the state agency consultant issued an opinion. The Administrative Law Judge discounted the only medical opinion in the record concerning that new and severe impairment.

Review and Ruling

No objections to the report and recommendation were filed within the permitted period. The court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none. Judge Laura M. Provinzino ordered that the report and recommendation be adopted; Gregory F.’s request for relief be granted in part and denied in part, as set out in the report and recommendation; the defendant’s request for relief be denied; and the case be remanded to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings. The opinion does not provide the details of the portions of Gregory F.’s request that were granted and denied.

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.