Caro Jr. v. O'Malley

Background

Domingo Caro Jr. filed this action seeking judicial review of the Acting Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of benefits under 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3). The parties filed competing motions for judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). A judgment on the pleadings is a decision based on the parties’ written submissions, without a trial.

Report and Recommendation

The opinion states that a magistrate judge recommended granting Caro’s motion, denying the Commissioner’s motion, and remanding the matter for further administrative proceedings. The parties had 14 days to object to the recommendation, but neither party filed an objection. The court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake apparent from the record.

Ruling

Judge Rochon found the report comprehensive and free of clear error and adopted it in its entirety. The court granted Caro’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, denied the Commissioner’s motion, and remanded the case for further administrative proceedings under section 405(g) of the Social Security Act. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the case.

The opinion contains an internal inconsistency about the magistrate judge: it first says the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Stein and that the April 29, 2025 report was filed by Magistrate Judge Stein, but later says the court adopted Magistrate Judge Jones’s report.