Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Jan. 26, 2022

Marcano v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
James Oetken
Docket
1:20-cv-04230
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Marcano v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Oetken granted Marcano’s motion, denied the Commissioner’s cross-motion, awarded benefits, and remanded only to calculate them.

Who this affects

Steven Marcano, who was awarded benefits, and the Commissioner of Social Security.

What happened

In Marcano v. Commissioner of Social Security, Steven Marcano asked the court to rule in his favor based on the existing court filings. A magistrate judge recommended granting his request, denying the Commissioner’s competing request, awarding benefits, and sending the case back only to calculate the benefits.

No party timely objected to that recommendation. The court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none.

Judge James Oetken adopted the recommendation. He granted Marcano’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, denied the Commissioner’s cross-motion, awarded Marcano benefits, and remanded the case solely for calculating those benefits.

The detailed version

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

Case
Marcano v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:20-cv-04230
Judge
James Oetken
Date
Jan. 26, 2022

Background

Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger issued a Report and Recommendation on November 16, 2021. The Report recommended granting Steven Marcano’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, denying the Commissioner of Social Security’s cross-motion, awarding Marcano benefits, and remanding the case solely for calculating the benefits.

Review of the Recommendation

Neither party filed a timely objection. Because there were no timely objections, Judge Oetken reviewed the Report for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the record. He found no such error and fully adopted the Report.

Ruling

The court granted Marcano’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, denied the Commissioner’s cross-motion, awarded Marcano benefits, and remanded the case solely for the calculation of benefits. The court directed the Clerk of Court to close the two listed motions and the case.

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.