April H. v. King
- Laura Provinzino
- 0:23-cv-03350
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In April H. v. King, Judge Provinzino reversed the benefits denial and remanded for further proceedings after adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
April H.’s application for Social Security benefits and the Social Security Administration’s decision denying it are affected. The agency must conduct further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation.
What happened
In April H. v. King, April H. challenged the Social Security Administration’s denial of her application for benefits.
A magistrate judge recommended reversing the denial and sending the matter back for further consideration of April H.’s ability to function, given the administrative law judge’s finding that she was moderately limited in understanding, remembering, and applying information. Neither side objected.
Judge Provinzino found no clear error, adopted the recommendation, granted April H.’s request for a remand, 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
- April H. v. King · No. 0:23-cv-03350
- Laura M. Provinzino
- Feb. 3, 2025
Background
April H. appealed the Social Security Administration Commissioner’s denial of her application for benefits. The opinion states that Michelle King became the Acting Commissioner on January 21, 2025, and that the court substituted her as the defendant in her official capacity.
Report and Recommendation
After receiving briefing, United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the court reverse the Commissioner’s decision and remand the matter for additional consideration. The recommendation focused on April H.’s residual functional capacity—the work-related abilities the agency determined she retained—in light of the administrative law judge’s finding that she was moderately limited in understanding, remembering, and applying information.
Neither party objected to the Report and Recommendation. The court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none.
Ruling
The court adopted the Report and Recommendation. It granted the relief of remand for further proceedings requested in April H.’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.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.