Walker v. Colvin

- 1 -
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
_____________________________________
STEPHANIE W.,
Plaintiff,
-v- 	6:25-CV-51 (AJB/ML)
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
_____________________________________
Hon. Anthony Brindisi, U.S. District Judge:
ORDER ON REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
On January 8, 2025, plaintiff Stephanie W.1 (“plaintiff”) filed this action seeking review
of the final decision of defendant Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying her
application for benefits under the Social Security Act. Dkt. No. 1. The case was initially assigned
to U.S. District Judge David N. Hurd, who referred the matter to U.S. Magistrate Judge Miroslav
Lovric for a Report & Recommendation (“R&R”). See Dkt. No. 4.
Thereafter, the Commissioner filed a certified copy of the Administrative Record, Dkt. No.
6, and the parties briefed the matter in accordance with General Order 18, which provides that an
appeal from the Commissioner’s denial of benefits will be treated as if the parties have cross-
moved for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
Dkt. Nos. 10, 11, 12. The matter has since been reassigned to this Court. Dkt. No. 13.
1 On May 1, 2018, the Judicial Conference’s Committee on Court Administration and Case Management issued a
memorandum that encouraged courts to better protect the privacy of non-governmental parties in Social Security
matters by using only the first name and last initial of the claimant in published opinions.
Case 6:25-cv-00051-AJB-ML Document 15 Filed 02/25/26 Page 1 of 2

- 2 -
On February 9, 2026, Judge Lovric advised by R&R that: (1) plaintiff’s motion should be
granted; (2) the Commissioner’s motion should be denied; (3) the Commissioner’s final decision
should be vacated; and (4) this matter should be remanded for further administrative proceedings
pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Dkt. No. 14.
Neither party has lodged objections, and the time period in which to do so has expired. See
Dkt. No. 14. Upon review for clear error, Judge Lovric’s R&R is accepted and will be adopted.
See F ED. R. C IV. P. 72(b).
Therefore, it is
ORDERED that
1. The Report & Recommendation (Dkt. No. 14) is ACCEPTED;
2. Plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED;
3. The Commissioner’s motion is DENIED;
4. The Commissioner’s final decision is VACATED; and
5. This matter is REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate the pending motion, enter a judgment ac-
cordingly, and close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 25, 2026
Utica, New York.
Case 6:25-cv-00051-AJB-ML Document 15 Filed 02/25/26 Page 2 of 2