Del Rosario v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:20-cv-06796
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Del Rosario v. Commissioner, Judge Ramos granted Del Rosario’s pleading motion, denied the Commissioner’s cross-motion, and remanded the case.
Del Rosario and the Commissioner of Social Security; the case was returned for further proceedings.
What happened
In Del Rosario v. Commissioner of Social Security, the court adopted in full Judge Jones’s Report and the reasons stated in its March 11, 2022 Opinion and Order. The judgment does not describe the underlying dispute or the Report’s reasoning.
The court granted Del Rosario’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, a request for a decision based on the written filings, and denied the Commissioner’s cross-motion. It remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Report.
Judge Ramos’s judgment also states that the parties’ failure to file written objections prevents appellate review of the decision. The court closed the case.
The detailed version
- Del Rosario v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:20-cv-06796
- Edgardo Ramos
- Mar. 14, 2022
Background
The provided judgment contains no description of the underlying Social Security dispute or of the reasoning in the Report and the March 11, 2022 Opinion and Order. It states that the court adopted Judge Jones’s Report in full.
Rulings
The court granted Del Rosario’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. This type of motion asks the court to decide a case based on the parties’ written submissions. The court denied the Commissioner of Social Security’s cross-motion.
The court remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Report. Because the judgment is a remand order, this is a substantive ruling under the applicable classification convention, even though the case was closed.
Other Disposition
The judgment states that the parties did not file written objections and that this failure precludes appellate review of the decision. It therefore ordered that the case be closed. The judgment does not state what further proceedings must occur on remand.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.