Ricardo D. v. Commissioner of Social Security

Background

Ricardo D. brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), which permits judicial review of certain Social Security decisions. He challenged an administrative law judge’s decision to terminate his disability insurance benefits.

The parties submitted a joint stipulation instead of separate motions for judgment on the pleadings. The Commissioner sought an order affirming the administrative law judge’s decision. Ricardo D. requested an award of benefits or, alternatively, a remand for a new hearing.

Report and Recommendation

Magistrate Judge Gary Jones recommended granting the Commissioner judgment on the pleadings and dismissing the case. The recommendation concluded that the administrative law judge’s findings concerning Ricardo D.’s medical improvement and residual functional capacity were supported by substantial evidence. It also concluded that the administrative law judge adequately developed the record and provided Ricardo D. a fair hearing.

Ricardo D. filed timely objections. The district court explained that properly made objections require an independent review of the challenged portions of a magistrate judge’s recommendation. But objections that are conclusory, repeat earlier arguments, or merely rehash prior briefing are reviewed for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake based on the full record.

Ruling

The court found that Ricardo D.’s objections repeated, and sometimes copied, arguments previously presented to Magistrate Judge Jones. It therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.

Judge Daniels overruled Ricardo D.’s objections and adopted the recommendation in full. The court denied Ricardo D.’s motion for an award of benefits or, alternatively, a remand; granted the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings; affirmed the Commissioner’s decision; and dismissed the action.