Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled July 18, 2023

Valdes v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:21-cv-00914
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Valdes v. Commissioner, Judge Broderick adopted the recommendation, denied Valdes’s motion, granted the Commissioner’s motion, and closed the case.

Who this affects

Sean Valdes and the Commissioner of Social Security

What happened

In Valdes v. Commissioner of Social Security, Sean Valdes asked the court to review the Commissioner’s decision denying him Social Security Disability Insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act.

Valdes moved for judgment on the pleadings, and the Commissioner filed a cross-motion. Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn recommended denying Valdes’s motion and granting the Commissioner’s motion. Neither side objected.

Judge Vernon S. Broderick reviewed the recommendation for clear error, found none, and adopted it in full. The court directed the Clerk’s Office to enter judgment, terminate open motions, and close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Valdes v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:21-cv-00914
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
July 18, 2023

Background

Sean Valdes brought this action seeking judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s final decision that he was not entitled to Social Security Disability Insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. Valdes was represented by counsel, as was the Commissioner.

Motions and recommendation

Valdes filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, which asks the court to decide the case based on the parties’ written submissions. The Commissioner filed a cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings. Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn issued a Report and Recommendation advising that Valdes’s motion be denied and the Commissioner’s motion be granted. The Report and Recommendation stated that the parties had fourteen days to object, but neither party objected or requested additional time.

Ruling

Under the governing procedure, the district court reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error because no timely objection had been filed. Judge Vernon S. Broderick found no clear error and adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The court therefore denied Valdes’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and granted the Commissioner’s cross-motion. It directed the Clerk’s Office to terminate any open motions, enter judgment in accordance with the order, 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.