Gordon v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:22-cv-04683
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Gordon v. Commissioner, Judge Schofield adopted a recommendation supporting the benefits denial, denied Gordon’s motion, and granted the Commissioner’s motion.
Charles Gordon and the Commissioner of Social Security; the ruling left the denial of Gordon’s disability insurance benefits in place and closed the case.
What happened
Charles Gordon v. Commissioner of Social Security concerned Gordon’s request for court review of the Commissioner’s decision denying him disability insurance benefits. Both sides asked for judgment based on the pleadings, the formal written allegations and responses in the case.
Magistrate Judge Jennifer E. Willis recommended denying Gordon’s motion and granting the Commissioner’s motion. She concluded that the benefits decision was supported by substantial evidence and used the correct legal standard. No timely objections to the recommendation were filed.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield found no clear error, adopted the recommendation in full, denied Gordon’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, and granted the Commissioner’s motion. The court directed the clerk to close the motions and the case.
The detailed version
- Gordon v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:22-cv-04683
- Lorna Schofield
- Sept. 5, 2023
Background
Charles Gordon filed this action seeking review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision denying his application for disability insurance benefits. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Jennifer E. Willis to issue a report and recommendation concerning any motions for judgment on the pleadings. Both Gordon and the Commissioner filed such motions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), which allows judgment based on the parties’ pleadings.
Report and Recommendation
On August 18, 2023, Magistrate Judge Willis recommended denying Gordon’s motion and granting the Commissioner’s motion. The report concluded that the Commissioner’s decision was supported by substantial evidence in the record and was based on the correct legal standard. The deadline for objections was fourteen days after service of the report, but no timely objections were filed.
District Court’s Ruling
Because no timely objections were filed, the district court reviewed the report for clear error on the face of the record. Judge Lorna G. Schofield found no clear error and adopted the report in full for the reasons stated in it. The court ordered that Gordon’s motion for judgment on the pleadings be DENIED and that the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings be GRANTED. The clerk was directed to close the two motions and the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.