Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Substantive rulingFiled June 12, 2023

Tiffany B. v. Kijakazi

Judge
Eric Tostrud
Docket
0:22-cv-01227
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Social SecuritySummary Judgment
In one sentence

In Tiffany B. v. Kijakazi, Judge Tostrud granted Tiffany B.’s motion, denied the Commissioner’s motion, and remanded for further proceedings.

Who this affects

Tiffany B. and Kilolo Kijakazi; the case returns to the administrative law judge for further proceedings.

What happened

In Tiffany B. v. Kijakazi, Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued a report and recommendation on May 22, 2023. The opinion does not describe the underlying Social Security dispute or the recommendation’s reasoning.

Neither party objected to the report and recommendation. The court therefore reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake, and found none.

Judge Eric C. Tostrud accepted the report and recommendation, granted Tiffany B.’s motion for summary judgment, denied Kilolo Kijakazi’s motion for summary judgment, and remanded the action to the administrative law judge for further proceedings.

The detailed version

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

Case
Tiffany B. v. Kijakazi · No. 0:22-cv-01227
Judge
Eric Tostrud
Date
June 12, 2023

Background

Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued a Report and Recommendation on May 22, 2023. The opinion does not state the underlying facts, the specific Social Security issue, or the recommendation’s reasoning.

Review of the Recommendation

No party objected to the Report and Recommendation. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the district court reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the recommendation. The court found no clear error.

Ruling

Judge Eric C. Tostrud accepted the Report and Recommendation. The court granted Tiffany B.’s motion for summary judgment, denied Kilolo Kijakazi’s motion for summary judgment, and remanded the action to the administrative law judge for further proceedings consistent with the order. The opinion does not specify what further proceedings are required.

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.