Gonzalez v. Saul

Background

Larry Gonzalez sought review of the Social Security Commissioner’s determination that he was not disabled under the Social Security Act. The parties filed cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), which asks the court to decide a case based on the pleadings and any incorporated materials.

Magistrate Judge Judith C. McCarthy issued a Report and Recommendation dated May 27, 2022. She concluded that substantial evidence supported the Commissioner’s disability determination and that deciding Gonzalez’s claim through a different administrative law judge than the one who conducted his hearing did not violate Gonzalez’s due process rights. She recommended denying Gonzalez’s motion, granting the Commissioner’s cross-motion, and entering judgment for the defendant.

Objections and Review

Gonzalez filed timely objections, and the Commissioner filed a response. The district court explained that objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation on a dispositive motion ordinarily receive fresh review. But Gonzalez’s objections copied his original supporting brief verbatim, repeating arguments that Judge McCarthy had already considered and rejected. The district court therefore reviewed the objections for clear error.

After reviewing the Report and Recommendation and the underlying record, the court found no error, clear or otherwise, in Judge McCarthy’s analysis.

Ruling

Judge Vincent L. Briccetti overruled Gonzalez’s objections and adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety as the court’s opinion. The court denied Gonzalez’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and granted the Commissioner’s cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings. The Clerk was directed to enter judgment accordingly, terminate the motions, and close the case.

A footnote states that Kilolo Kijakazi was substituted as the defendant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d).