Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Substantive rulingFiled Mar. 8, 2023

Brent Z. v. Kijakazi

Judge
Jerry Blackwell
Docket
0:22-cv-00511
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Social SecuritySummary Judgment
In one sentence

In Brent Z. v. Kijakazi, Judge Blackwell remanded the Social Security decision after partially granting Brent Z.’s motion and denying the Commissioner’s motion.

Who this affects

Brent Z. and the Social Security Administration, whose decision was remanded for further consideration of the one-to-two-step task limitation.

What happened

In Brent Z. v. Kijakazi, the court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation because neither side filed timely objections. The court found no clear error.

The court accepted the recommendation, granted in part and denied in part Brent Z.’s motion for summary judgment, and denied the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment. It sent the Commissioner’s decision back to the Social Security Administration to address a one-to-two-step task limitation.

Judge Jerry W. Blackwell entered the order on March 8, 2023. The order does not explain the recommendation’s full reasoning or identify which parts of Brent Z.’s motion were granted and denied.

The detailed version

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

Case
Brent Z. v. Kijakazi · No. 0:22-cv-00511
Judge
Jerry W. Blackwell
Date
Mar. 8, 2023

Background

The court considered a Report and Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty, dated January 30, 2023. No objections were filed within the permitted time. Without timely objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake apparent from the record. The court found no clear error.

Rulings

The court accepted the Report and Recommendation. It granted in part and denied in part Brent Z.’s motion for summary judgment, denied the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment, and remanded the Commissioner’s decision to the Social Security Administration.

The remand was ordered so the agency could address the one-to-two-step task limitation identified in the Report and Recommendation. The order does not provide the recommendation’s complete analysis or specify which portions of Brent Z.’s motion were granted or denied. The order also notes that the recommendation’s discussion of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 was consistent with recent Eighth Circuit precedent.

Result

The Social Security Administration must address the specified task limitation on remand. 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.