Case Name in Social Security Case - Unavailable

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
____________________
SHANNON R.,1
Plaintiff,
v. No. 1:24-cv-01143-MLG-LF
FRANK BISIGNANO, Commissioner
of the Social Security Administration,
Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE FASHING’S
PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Shannon R.’s Motion for Judgment on the
Pleadings (“Motion”), Doc. 10. Pursuant to the Court’s Order of Referral, Doc. 17, Magistrate
Judge Laura Fashing filed her Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition (“PFRD”) on
February 25, 2026. Doc. 18. Judge Fashing recommends that the Court grant the Motion and
remand the matter to the Commissioner for further proceedings because the administrative law
judge’s (“ALJ”) finding that “Plaintiff’s autonomic dysfunction did not meet or equal a Listing
was impermissibly conclusory and constituted reversible error.” Doc. 18 at 1-2. Judge Fashing
concluded that the ALJ erred because her analysis at step three was insufficient under Tenth Circuit
precedent, and Judge Fashing further concluded that this error was not harmless because the ALJ’s
later findings did not reveal whether the ALJ compared Plaintiff’s autonomic dysfunction and
related symptoms to any specific Listing, and if so, why Plaintiff’s diagnosis and symptoms fell
short of that Listing. Id. at 7-10.
1 In the interest of privacy, this opinion uses only the first name and the initial of the last name of
the non-governmental party in this case.
Case 1:24-cv-01143-MLG-LF Document 26 Filed 10/14/26 Page 1 of 3

2
The PFRD notified the parties of their ability to file objections within fourteen days and
warned them that failure to timely file objections would waive de novo review in this Court or an
appellate court. Id. at 11. Defendant Commissioner of Social Security (“the Commissioner”) filed
timely objections,2 arguing that Judge Fashing did not properly apply the substantial evidence
standard of review, Doc. 21 at 2-3; that the PFRD’s proposed findings improperly shift the burden
to the Commissioner, id. at 3-5, and are contrary to agency policy, id. at 5-7; and that the ALJ
adequately articulated her listing analysis while Plaintiff failed to provide medical findings that
could satisfy the criteria of a listing, id. at 7-12. Plaintiff filed her Reply to the SSA’s objections
on March 26, 2026. See Doc. 22.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court reviewed de novo the record
and all parts of the PFRD to which the Commissioner objected. Having thoroughly considered the
PFRD, the Commissioner’s objections, and Plaintiff’s Reply, the Court agrees with Judge Fashing
that “the ALJ’s finding that Plaintiff’s autonomic dysfunction did not meet or equal a Listing was
impermissibly conclusory and constituted reversible error.” Doc. 18 at 10. The Commissioner’s
objections, including that the PFRD “turn[s] the substantial evidence standard of review on its
head, improperly shifts Plaintiff’s burden of production to the Commissioner, and are at odds with
controlling authority,” lack merit. Doc. 21 at 2.
In short, the Court finds no reason either in law or fact to depart from Judge Fashing’s
recommended disposition. Therefore:
1. The Commissioner’s objections are overruled.
2. The PFRD, Doc. 18, is adopted.
2 Shortly before the fourteen-day deadline, the Commissioner moved for an extension to file
objections, see Doc. 19, which the Court granted, see Doc. 20.
Case 1:24-cv-01143-MLG-LF Document 26 Filed 10/14/26 Page 2 of 3

3
3. Plaintiff’s Motion, Doc. 10, is granted.
4. This matter is remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings.
It is so ordered.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
MATTHEW L. GARCIA
Case 1:24-cv-01143-MLG-LF Document 26 Filed 10/14/26 Page 3 of 3