Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Feb. 27, 2023

Nazario v. Kilolo Kijakazi

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:21-cv-10663
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Nazario v. Kijakazi, Judge Engelmayer granted Nazario’s motion and denied the Commissioner’s cross-motion in her Social Security disability-benefits case.

Who this affects

Angela Bencebi Nazario and the Social Security Commissioner; the ruling concerns Nazario’s claim for disability insurance benefits for the period from July 1, 2012, through December 3, 2013.

What happened

In Angela Bencebi Nazario v. Kilolo Kijakazi, Nazario asked the court to review the Social Security Commissioner’s decision denying her disability insurance benefits for the period from July 1, 2012, through December 3, 2013. She asked the court to award benefits or send the matter back for a new hearing, while the Commissioner asked the court to uphold the decision.

A magistrate judge recommended granting Nazario’s motion and denying the Commissioner’s motion. Neither side objected to that recommendation. The court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none.

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer adopted the recommendation in full, granted Nazario’s motion, and denied the Commissioner’s cross-motion. The court directed the Clerk to terminate the pending motions and close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Nazario v. Kilolo Kijakazi · No. 1:21-cv-10663
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Feb. 27, 2023

Background

Angela Bencebi Nazario brought this action under Section 405(g) of the Social Security Act, which allows judicial review of a final decision by the Social Security Commissioner. She challenged the Commissioner’s decision that she was not entitled to disability insurance benefits for the period from July 1, 2012, through December 3, 2013.

Nazario moved for judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). She asked the court to reverse the Commissioner’s decision and remand the matter solely for calculation and payment of benefits or, alternatively, remand it for a new hearing. The Commissioner filed a cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings, asking the court to affirm the decision.

Report and Recommendation

Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger recommended granting Nazario’s motion and denying the Commissioner’s cross-motion. Neither Nazario nor the Commissioner objected to the recommendation.

When no timely objection is filed, the district court reviews the recommendation for clear error on the face of the record. The court stated that it had carefully reviewed Judge Lehrburger’s report and found no such error. It also stated that the failure to object waived appellate review of the recommendation.

Ruling

The court adopted the report in full. It granted Nazario’s motion and denied the Commissioner’s cross-motion. The Clerk of Court was directed to strike the entry at docket number 25, terminate the motions pending at docket numbers 18 and 21, and close the case.

The amended opinion’s conclusion does not separately state whether the court ordered calculation and payment of benefits or a new hearing; it states only that Nazario’s motion was granted and the Commissioner’s cross-motion was denied.

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.