Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
JACOB B.,
Plaintiff,
-against- 	5:24-CV-1096 (LEK/ML)
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
I. 	INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Jacob B. brings this Social Security appeal pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and
1383(c)(3) against the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”). Dkt. No. 1
(“Appeal”). Plaintiff filed a brief in support of their Appeal. Dkt. No. 14. The government filed a
brief in opposition. Dkt. No. 18. Plaintiff filed a reply. Dkt. No. 21. The Honorable Miroslav
Lovric, United States Magistrate Judge, reviewed Plaintiff’s Appeal and, on November 17, 2025,
issued a report and recommendation. Dkt. No. 22 (“Report and Recommendation”). Judge Lovric
ultimately recommended granting Plaintiff’s Appeal and reversing and remanding the matter to
the Commissioner for further proceedings. Id. at 19.
No party has filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. For the reasons that
follow, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in its entirety.
II. 	BACKGROUND
The Court assumes familiarity with Judge Lovric’s Report and Recommendation, as well
as with Plaintiff’s factual allegations as detailed therein. See R. & R. at 2, 5–7.
Case 5:24-cv-01096-LEK-ML Document 23 Filed 01/22/26 Page 1 of 3

2
III. 	STANDARD OF REVIEW
“Within fourteen days after being served with a copy [of the Magistrate Judge’s report
and recommendation], any party may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings
and recommendations as provided by rules of the court.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also L.R.
72.1. However, if no objections are made, a district court need only review a report and
recommendation for clear error. See DiPilato v. 7-Eleven, Inc., 662 F. Supp. 2d 333, 339
(S.D.N.Y. 2009) (“The district court may adopt those portions of a report and recommendation to
which no timely objections have been made, provided no clear error is apparent from the face of
the record.”). Clear error “is present when upon review of the entire record, the court is left with
the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” Rivera v. Fed. Bureau of
Prisons, 368 F. Supp. 3d 741, 744 (S.D.N.Y. 2019). Additionally, a district court will ordinarily
refuse to consider an argument that could have been, but was not, presented to the magistrate
judge in the first instance. See Hubbard v. Kelley, 752 F. Supp. 2d 311, 312–13 (W.D.N.Y. 2009)
(“In this circuit, it is established law that a district judge will not consider new arguments raised
in objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation that could have been raised
before the magistrate but were not.” (internal quotation marks omitted)). Upon review, a court
“may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the
magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
IV. 	DISCUSSION
No party objected to the Report and Recommendation “[w]ithin fourteen days after being
served with a copy” of it. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Accordingly, the Court reviews the Report
and Recommendation for clear error.
Having found none, the Court approves and adopts the Report and Recommendation in
its entirety.
Case 5:24-cv-01096-LEK-ML Document 23 Filed 01/22/26 Page 2 of 3

3
V. 	CONCLUSION
Accordingly, it is hereby:
ORDERED, that the Report and Recommendation, Dkt. No. 22, is APPROVED and
ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED, that Plaintiff’s Social Security appeal, Dkt. No. 1, is GRANTED; and it is
further
ORDERED, the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision be REVERSED; and it is
further
ORDERED, that this matter be REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security
for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk serve a copy of this Memorandum-Decision and Order on all
parties in accordance with the Local Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: 	January 22, 2026
Albany, New York
LAWRENCE E. KAHN
United States District Judge
Case 5:24-cv-01096-LEK-ML Document 23 Filed 01/22/26 Page 3 of 3