(SS) Piela v. Commissioner of Social Security

Docket 1:25-cv-01280

Filed
2025-09-28
Terminated
Not recorded
Case type
cv

Outcome

No sourced outcome is recorded. A termination date alone does not establish who prevailed.

Parties and representation

      Party and firm records are not available for this case.

      Panel

        No sourced panel votes are recorded.

        Opinions and documents

        1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SUSAN PIELA, ) Case No.: 1:25-cv-01280-KES-GSA ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND ) RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING 13 v. ) PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ) JUDGMENT, DENYING THE 14 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, ) COMMISSIONER’S CROSS MOTION, AND ) REMANDING THE ACTION FOR FURTHER 15 Defendant. ) PROCEEDINGS ) 16 ) ) (Docs. 9, 11, 13) 17 ) ) 18 19 Plaintiff Susan Piela seeks judicial review of the administrative decision denying Plaintiff’s 20 application for benefits under the Social Security Act. Doc. 1. The matter was referred to a United 21 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. The matter was fully 22 briefed before the magistrate judge. Doc. 9, 11, 12. 23 The magistrate judge entered findings and recommendations that recommended entry of 24 judgment in plaintiff’s favor and remand to the Commissioner of Social Security for further 25 proceedings. Doc. 13. The Court served the findings and recommendations on the parties and notified 26 them that any objections were due within 14 days. Doc. 13 at 21. The Court also advised the parties 27 that the “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on 28 1 || appeal.” /d. (citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014)). Neither party filed 2 || objections, and the time to do so has passed. 3 In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the court performed a de novo review of this cas 4 || Having carefully reviewed the matter, the court concludes the Findings and Recommendations a 5 || supported by the record and proper analysis. The court ORDERS. 6 1. The Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 13) are ADOPTED in full. 7 2. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (“Opening Brief”) (Doc. 9) is GRANTED. 8 3. Defendant’s cross-motion to affirm the administrative decision (“Brief”) (Doc. 11) is 9 DENIED. 10 4. This action is REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security pursuant to 11 sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings consistent with the finding 12 and recommendations (Doc. 13). 13 5. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to terminate all pending motions, to enter judgment 14 in favor of Plaintiff Susan Piela and against Defendant Commissioner of Social 15 Security, and to close this case. 16 17 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. _ ( 9 Dated: _ September 25, 2026 4h 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

        Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.