Schirtz v. Bisignano

- 1 -
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
_____________________________________
TIMOTHY S.,
Plaintiff,
-v- 	5:25-CV-251 (AJB/PJE)
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
_____________________________________
Hon. Anthony Brindisi, U.S. District Judge:
ORDER ON REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
On February 26, 2025, plaintiff Timothy S.1 (“plaintiff”) filed this action seeking review
of the final decision of defendant Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying his
application for benefits under the Social Security Act. 	Dkt. No. 1. 	Along with his complaint,
plaintiff moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP Application”). Dkt. No. 3.
The matter was referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul J. Evangelista for a Report & Rec-
ommendation (“R&R”). See Dkt. No. 4. Judge Evangelista granted plaintiff’s IFP Application,
Dkt. No. 7, the Commissioner filed a certified copy of the Administrative Record, Dkt. No. 9, 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. 14,
16, 17.
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 5:25-cv-00251-AJB-PJE Document 19 Filed 03/16/26 Page 1 of 2

- 2 -
On February 26, 2026, Judge Evangelista advised by R&R that: (1) plaintiff’s motion
should be denied; (2) the Commissioner’s motion should be granted; (3) the Commissioner’s final
decision should be affirmed; and (4) plaintiff’s complaint should be dismissed. See Dkt. No. 18.
Neither party has lodged objections, and the time period in which to do so has expired. See
Dkt. No. 18. 	Upon review for clear error, Judge Evangelista’s R&R is accepted and will be
adopted. See FED. R. C IV. P. 72(b).
Therefore, it is
ORDERED that
1. The Report & Recommendation (Dkt. No. 18) is ACCEPTED;
2. Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED;
3. The Commissioner’s motion is GRANTED;
4. The Commissioner’s final decision is AFFIRMED; and
5. Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED.
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: March 16, 2026
Utica, New York.
Case 5:25-cv-00251-AJB-PJE Document 19 Filed 03/16/26 Page 2 of 2