Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Oct. 16, 2023

Fletcher v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Docket
1:22-cv-02873
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Fletcher v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Ramos affirmed the denial of Supplemental Security Income, granted the Commissioner’s motion, and denied Fletcher’s motion.

Who this affects

Keisha Natalie Fletcher and the Commissioner of Social Security; the court’s ruling upheld the denial of Fletcher’s Supplemental Security Income application.

What happened

Fletcher v. Commissioner of Social Security concerned Keisha Natalie Fletcher’s challenge to the denial of her application for Supplemental Security Income. The parties each asked the court to rule based on the written record.

A magistrate judge recommended granting the Commissioner’s motion, denying Fletcher’s motion, and dismissing the case. Neither party objected to that recommendation, and the district court found no error in it.

Judge Ramos adopted the recommendation, granted the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, denied Fletcher’s motion, affirmed the Commissioner’s final decision, and directed the clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Fletcher v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:22-cv-02873
Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Date
Oct. 16, 2023

Background

Keisha Natalie Fletcher brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 205(g), challenging the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision denying her application for Supplemental Security Income. The parties filed cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). A judgment on the pleadings is a decision based on the pleadings and the written record, without a trial.

The district court had referred the case to a magistrate judge. Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Commissioner’s motion be granted, Fletcher’s motion be denied, and the case be dismissed. The report gave the parties fourteen days to file written objections. No party filed an objection.

Court’s Analysis

When no timely objection is filed, a district court may adopt the portions of a magistrate judge’s report that do not show clear error. Clear error means an obvious mistake in the decision. The district court reviewed Magistrate Judge Moses’s report and found no error, clear or otherwise.

Disposition

The court adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation. The Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings was GRANTED, Fletcher’s motion was DENIED, and the Commissioner’s final decision was affirmed. The clerk was directed to terminate the motions and close the case. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.