Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 2, 2020

Garcia v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:20-cv-07539
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Social SecurityPro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Garcia v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Engelmayer granted Hugo Garcia’s request to proceed without paying filing fees in his Social Security case.

Who this affects

Hugo Antonio Garcia, who may proceed in this action without paying the court’s filing fees; the opinion does not resolve his disability-benefits claim.

What happened

Garcia v. Commissioner of Social Security concerns Hugo Antonio Garcia’s request to proceed without paying court filing fees while seeking review of the Commissioner’s denial of his disability benefits claim.

A magistrate judge recommended granting the request. Because neither side objected, the court reviewed that recommendation for clear error and found none, while noting that the lack of objections waived appellate review of the recommendation.

Judge Engelmayer adopted the recommendation in full and granted Garcia’s motion to proceed without paying filing fees. The opinion did not decide whether Garcia was entitled to disability benefits.

The detailed version

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

Case
Garcia v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:20-cv-07539
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Nov. 2, 2020

Background

Hugo Antonio Garcia, representing himself, sued the Commissioner of Social Security to seek review of the denial of his claim for Disability Insurance Benefits under the Social Security Act. Garcia asked to proceed without paying the court’s filing fees. The pending issue was that fee request, not the merits of his disability-benefits claim.

Recommendation and review

Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave recommended that the court grant Garcia’s fee request. No party filed an objection. Under the governing procedure, the district court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake apparent from the record.

The court found no facial error in the recommendation and adopted it in its entirety. The court also stated that the parties’ failure to object waived objections and prevented appellate review of the recommendation.

Ruling

Judge Engelmayer granted Garcia’s motion to proceed without paying filing fees. The opinion did not rule on whether the Commissioner properly denied Garcia’s disability benefits claim. The Clerk was directed to mail Garcia a copy of the decision at the address on file.

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.