Martin v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Analisa Torres
- 1:20-cv-01003
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Martin v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Torres granted remand and sent the case back to an administrative law judge for further proceedings.
Tenasia Patricia Martin’s Social Security case was returned to the administrative law judge for further proceedings; the district-court case was closed.
What happened
In Martin v. Commissioner of Social Security, the court considered the Commissioner’s request for judgment on the pleadings and remand in Tenasia Patricia Martin’s Social Security case.
No one objected to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. The court reviewed that report for clear error, found none, and adopted it in full.
Judge Torres granted the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings to remand and sent the matter to the administrative law judge for further proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The case was closed in the district court.
The detailed version
- Martin v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:20-cv-01003
- Analisa Torres
- Jan. 21, 2021
Background
This judgment concerns Tenasia Patricia Martin’s case against the Commissioner of Social Security. The judgment states that the Commissioner moved for judgment on the pleadings to remand the matter. The opinion text does not describe the underlying Social Security dispute or the administrative law judge’s prior decision.
Report and Recommendation
The court had received a report and recommendation from Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron. No objections were filed. The court therefore reviewed the report and recommendation for clear error, found none, and adopted it in its entirety. The judgment states that the reasons for the ruling were provided in the court’s January 20, 2021 order.
Ruling
The court granted the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings to remand. It remanded the matter to the administrative law judge for further proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), a provision governing judicial review and remand in Social Security cases. The district-court case was closed. The judgment does not state what result the administrative law judge must reach or whether Martin was awarded benefits.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.