govinfo:USCOURTS-flsd-9_25-cv-80249-1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
 
CASE NO.  25-80249-CIV-SMITH 
 
SHALONDA LATRICE  
MCCLOUD GARRETT, 
 
 Plaintiff,  
v. 
 
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 
 
 Defendant.  
                                                                                  / 
 
ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE 
 
 This matter is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) [DE 
23] of the Honorable Ellen F. D’Angelo, U.S. Magistrate Judge, on Cross-Motions for Summary 
Judgment [DE 17] and [DE 18].  In her thorough and well -reasoned Report, the Honorable  
D’Angelo recommends that: Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment be DENIED, and that 
Defendant’s Cross Motion for Summary Judgment be GRANTED. Plaintiff filed objections to the 
Report [DE 24], essentially repeating her initial arguments to the Magistrate Judge.   Defendant 
filed a response to the objections [DE 25]. 
 A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and 
recommendation.  28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).  Those portions of the report and recommendation to 
which objections are made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific 
findings that the party disagrees with.”  United States v. Schultz , 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11 th Cir. 
2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).  Any portions of the report and recommendation to which 
no specific objection is made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. 
WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. 
Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). 
Case 9:25-cv-80249-RS   Document 26   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/19/2026   Page 1 of 2
 The Court, having considered the Honorable  D’Angelo’s Report, P laintiff’s objections 
thereto, and having conducted a de novo review of the record, agrees with Magistrate D’Angelo’s 
well-reasoned analysis and her recommendations.  Accordingly, it is  
 ORDERED that: 
 1)  The Report and Recommendation  [DE 23] is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED and 
incorporated by reference into this Court’s Order.  
2) Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [DE17] is DENIED.  
3) Defendant’s Cross Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 19] is GRANTED. 
4) Plaintiff’s Objections are OVERRULED. 
 5) This case is CLOSED. 
 DONE and ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 19th day of March, 2026. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
cc:  All counsel of record 
Case 9:25-cv-80249-RS   Document 26   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/19/2026   Page 2 of 2

Passage view · GavelSight