UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 19-cv-25023-BLOOM/Louis LYL VALENTINO,

Plaintiff,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,

Defendant. ____________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff Lyl Valentino’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. [18] (“Plaintiff’s Motion”), and Defendant, as Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Andrew M. Saul’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. [21] (“Defendant’s Motion”). In this action, Plaintiff seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security Administration denying Plaintiff’s application for social security disability benefits under the Social Security Act,

, et seq. ECF No. [1]. This matter was referred to the Honorable Lauren F. Louis, United States Magistrate Judge, for a ruling on all pre-trial, non-dispositive matters and a report and recommendation on any dispositive matters pursuant to

and Local Magistrate Judge Rule 1. ECF No. [17]. On September 18, 2020, Judge Louis issued her Report and Recommendation (“Report”) recommending that Plaintiff’s Motion be granted, Defendant’s Motion be denied, and the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) be reversed and remanded with instructions to accord proper weight to Plaintiff’s treating physicians, and to reassess steps three through five of the Social Security Administration sequential evaluation process. ECF No. [23]. The Report further advised the parties that any objections were due within fourteen days of being served with a copy of the Report (i.e., by October 2, 2020). Id.; see

(b)(1)(C) (“Within fourteen days after being served with a copy [of a report and recommendation], any party may serve and file written objections . . . as provided by rules of court.”). To date, neither Plaintiff nor Defendant has

filed objections to the Report, nor have they sought additional time in which to do so. Nonetheless, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the Report and the record in this case, and is otherwise fully advised. See Williams v. McNeil,

(11th Cir. 2009) (citing

(b)(1)). Upon careful review, the Court finds Judge Louis’s Report to be well-reasoned and correct. The Court agrees with the analysis in the Report, and concludes that, for the reasons set forth therein, Plaintiff’s Motion should be granted, Defendant’s Motion should be denied, and the decision of the ALJ should be reversed and remanded for further review consistent with the Report’s recommendation. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. Magistrate Judge Louis’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. [23], is ADOPTED. 2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. [18], is GRANTED. 3. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. [21], is DENIED. 4. The decision of the Administrative Law Judge is REVERSED and REMANDED so that the ALJ can reanalyze steps three through five of the Social Security Administration five-step inquiry, including affording proper weight to the opinions of Plaintiff’s treating physicians. 5. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the above-styled case. Case No. 19-cv-25023-BLOOM/Louis

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on October 5, 2020.

BETH BLOOM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies to: The Honorable Lauren F. Louis Counsel of Record