Perez v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:20-cv-00513
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Perez v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Karas granted the Commissioner’s motion after adopting an unopposed recommendation concerning Perez’s SSI application.
Samantha Tamara Kenny Perez, whose challenge to the denial of Supplemental Security Income was resolved in favor of the Commissioner of Social Security.
What happened
Perez v. Commissioner of Social Security concerned Samantha Tamara Kenny Perez’s challenge to the denial of her application for Supplemental Security Income. She brought the case under a federal law allowing judicial review of Social Security decisions and represented herself.
The Commissioner asked the court to grant judgment on the pleadings and uphold the decision denying Perez’s application. A magistrate judge recommended granting that motion. Perez did not file an opposition or objections, even after receiving additional time and notice of the deadlines.
Judge Kenneth M. Karas reviewed the recommendation for clear error, found none, and adopted it in its entirety. The court granted the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and directed the clerk to close the case.
The detailed version
- Perez v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 7:20-cv-00513
- Kenneth Karas
- Mar. 29, 2021
Background
Samantha Tamara Kenny Perez, proceeding without a lawyer, challenged the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision denying her application for Supplemental Security Income. She brought the action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), which permits federal-court review of certain Social Security decisions.
Perez initially filed the action in the Eastern District of New York. The case was transferred to the Southern District of New York under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).
Proceedings Before the Order
The Commissioner moved for judgment on the pleadings, seeking to affirm the decision denying Perez’s application. A magistrate judge had been assigned to the matter and gave Perez additional time to oppose the motion because she was representing herself. Perez did not file an opposition.
The magistrate judge later issued a report and recommendation advising the court to grant the Commissioner’s motion and enter judgment for the Commissioner. The report gave Perez 17 days to object. After Perez requested additional time, the court extended the deadline to March 12, 2021 and stated that no further extensions would be granted. Perez did not file objections by that deadline.
Court’s Review and Ruling
Because no objections were filed, the district court reviewed the report and recommendation for clear error on the face of the record. The court found no clear error and adopted the report and recommendation in its entirety.
The court granted the Commissioner’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, directed the clerk to terminate the pending motion, and closed the case. The order also directed that a copy be mailed to Perez. Judge Kenneth M. Karas signed the order on March 29, 2021.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.