SEVERE-SMITH
v.
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, dismissing the Plaintiff's Complaint without prejudice.
Plaintiff filed a Complaint and an Application related to a Social Security matter. The Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal without prejudice due t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Clear Error Standard Of Review cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon United State Magistrate Judge Lauren F. Louis’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (ECF No. 5).
On September 23, 2022, this Court referred pretrial matters to Magistrate Judge Louis. See ECF No.
4. Thereafter, upon a sua sponte review of the record, Magistrate Judge Louis issued the R&R, recommending Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 1) be DISMISSED without prejudice and with leave to amend, and that Plaintiff’s Application (ECF No. 3) be DENIED without prejudice. R&R at 3. No objections to the R&R were filed, and the time to do so has now passed. The matter is now ripe for review. As set forth below, the Court ADOPTS the R&R. The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b)(3). The Court “must consider de novo any objection to the magistrate judge’s recommendation.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b)(3). A de novo review is therefore required if a party files “a proper, specific objection” to a factual finding contained in the report. Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781,
Magistrate Judge Louis recommends dismissing this action because the Court lacks jurisdiction. R&R at 5. Namely, district courts only have jurisdiction to review final decisions made by the Commissioner of Social Security. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
Magistrate Judge Louis recommends that “because the Complaint does not unambiguously establish that Plaintiff has exhausted the administrative review process, the Court lacks jurisdiction over this social security matter and the matter should be dismissed without prejudice.” R&R at 6 (citing Pierre v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 11-62408-CIV, 2012 WL 1066811, at *3 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 16, 2012), report and recommendation adopted, No. 11-62408-CIV, 2012 WL 1060154 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 28, 2012). This Court agrees. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the R&R, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Magistrate Judge Louis’s R&R (ECF No. 5) is ADOPTED. The Complaint is
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, thiszg¢4 day of November 2022.
LL MOORE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE c: All counsel of record