REALE

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of the Commissioner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand. (Dkt. 12) On December 15, 2022, United States Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that the Commissioner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand, (Dkt. 12), be GRANTED. After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F. 2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983). A district judge “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).This requires that the district judge “give fresh consideration to those issues to which specific objection has been made by a party.” Jeffrey S. v. State Bd. of Educ., 896 F. 2d 507, 512 (11th Cir.1990) (quoting H.R. 1609, 94th Cong. § 2 (1976)). In the absence of specific objections, there is no

requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F. 2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry., 37 F. 3d 603, 604

(11th Cir. 1994). Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation, in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court is of the opinion that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. 13), is CONFIRMED and

ADOPTED as part of this Order; 2. The Commissioner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand, (Dkt. 12), is GRANTED; 3. The Clerk be directed to enter judgment for Plaintiff with instructions that the Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED under sentence four

of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and the case is REMANDED for further administrative proceedings consistent with the reasons stated in the Commissioner’s motion; 4. The CLERK is further directed to include the following language in the judgment: The Court reserves jurisdiction on the question of attorney’s fees and costs pending receipt of a motion that conforms to the recent Standing Order on Management of Social Security Cases. In re: Administrative Orders of the Chief Judge, No. 3:21-mc-1-TJC (Dkt. 42) (Dec. 7, 2021). Any fee application must be filed within the parameters of the Standing Order; and

5. The CLERK is DIRECTED to CLOSE the case.

DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 16th day of December, 2022.

MARYS. SORIVEN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Any Unrepresented Person