Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Aug. 29, 2022

Guadalupe v. Saul

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:21-cv-00278
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Guadalupe v. Commissioner, Judge Engelmayer adopted a recommendation and remanded Guadalupe’s Social Security benefits case for further proceedings.

Who this affects

Sandra Guadalupe and the Commissioner of Social Security; the case was sent back for further proceedings concerning Guadalupe’s claim for disability insurance benefits before February 19, 2020.

What happened

Sandra Guadalupe asked the federal court to review the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her claim for disability insurance benefits for the period before February 19, 2020. Both sides filed motions asking for judgment based on the written record.

Magistrate Judge Jennifer E. Willis recommended sending the case back for further proceedings. Neither side objected, so the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer adopted the recommendation in full and remanded the case for further proceedings. The court also directed the clerk to close the pending motions and the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Guadalupe v. Saul · No. 1:21-cv-00278
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Aug. 29, 2022

Background

Sandra Guadalupe brought the case under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), which allows federal-court review of a final Social Security decision. She challenged the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her claim for disability insurance benefits for the period before February 19, 2020.

Guadalupe moved for judgment on the pleadings, meaning she asked the court to decide the case based on the existing written record. The Commissioner filed a cross-motion for the same type of judgment. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Jennifer E. Willis, who issued a Report and Recommendation on August 9, 2022, recommending that the case be remanded for further proceedings.

Court’s Review

Neither party objected to the Report and Recommendation. Under the applicable review standard, the district court therefore examined the report for clear error—an obvious mistake on the face of the record. The court stated that its review of Judge Willis’s report revealed no facial error and adopted the report in its entirety.

Ruling

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer remanded the case for further proceedings. The opinion does not describe the specific issues that required additional proceedings because it incorporates the factual summary in Judge Willis’s report rather than repeating it. The court directed the clerk to close all pending motions and close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.