Court, Explained
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Back to docket
Substantive rulingFiled Sept. 3, 2025

Desiderio v. Bisignano

Judge
Laura Provinzino
Docket
0:24-cv-02981
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Social SecuritySummary Judgment
In one sentence

In Jessica D. v. Bisignano, Judge Provinzino adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation and upheld the Social Security Administration's denial of Jessica D.'s disability insurance benefits claim.

Who this affects

Individuals who have applied for Social Security disability insurance benefits and whose claims have been denied by the Commissioner, particularly those whose federal court challenges are reviewed under a deferential standard due to failure to object to a magistrate judge's recommendation.

What happened

In Jessica D. v. Bisignano (No. 24-cv-2981), Jessica D. sued after the Commissioner of Social Security denied her application for Social Security disability insurance benefits. She asked the federal court to set aside the Commissioner's decision and send the case back to the Social Security Administration for further review.

A magistrate judge — a lower-level federal judicial officer who assists the district court — reviewed the case and issued a Report and Recommendation concluding that the Commissioner's decision should stand. Neither Jessica D. nor the Commissioner objected to that recommendation within the required time period, so the district court reviewed it only for obvious mistakes.

Finding no clear error in the magistrate judge's analysis, Judge Laura M. Provinzino adopted the Report and Recommendation in full on September 3, 2025. The court denied Jessica D.'s request to vacate and remand, granted the Commissioner's request to affirm the decision, and dismissed Jessica D.'s complaint with prejudice — meaning she cannot refile this same lawsuit in federal court.

The detailed version

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

Case
Desiderio v. Bisignano · No. 0:24-cv-02981
Judge
Laura M. Provinzino
Date
Sept. 3, 2025

Background

Plaintiff Jessica D. brought this action challenging the final decision of Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security, denying her application for Social Security disability insurance benefits. She asked the district court to vacate the Commissioner's decision and remand the matter to the Social Security Administration (SSA) for further proceedings.

Magistrate Judge Proceedings

United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on July 30, 2025, recommending that Jessica D.'s requests be denied and that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed. Neither party filed objections to the R&R within the time period prescribed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2) and Local Rule 72.2(b)(1).

Standard of Review

Because no party objected to the R&R, the court applied a "clear error" standard of review — a deferential standard under which the court looks only for obvious mistakes in the magistrate judge's analysis, rather than conducting a fresh, independent review of the record. The court cited Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996).

Ruling

Judge Provinzino found no clear error in the R&R and issued the following dispositions:

  1. The R&R was adopted.
  2. Jessica D.'s request to vacate the Commissioner's decision and remand to the SSA was denied.
  3. The Commissioner's request that his decision be affirmed was granted.
  4. Jessica D.'s complaint was dismissed with prejudice, meaning she cannot bring this same federal court challenge again.

The court directed that judgment be entered accordingly.

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.