Tina Hull v. Comm. of Social Security
OPINION filed : AFFIRMED, decision not for publication. Alice M. Batchelder and Raymond M. Kethledge, Circuit Judges and The Honorable Curtis L. Collier, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Tennessee, sitting by designation.
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
File Name: 15a0086n.06
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
Jan 28, 2015
DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk
ON APPEAL FROM THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE EASTERN
DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Before: BATCHELDER and KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judges; COLLIER, District Judge.*
CURTIS L. COLLIER, District Judge. Appellant Tina Hull (“Hull”) appeals the district
court’s order accepting the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing
the action in favor of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration.
Hull suffers from a variety of medical issues and, as a result of those ailments, sought
disabled status. After considering the evidence, the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) assessed
Hull’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) and testimony from the vocational expert and found
that Hull did not meet the criteria for disabled status. Hull argues that the ALJ failed to account
for her difficulties in concentration in both the RFC and the hypothetical question posed to the
She also argues that the ALJ’s assessment failed to account for the
The Honorable Curtis L. Collier, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of
Tennessee, sitting by designation.
Tina Hull v. Commissioner of Social Security
compounding effects that her obesity had on her other ailments. Finally, she argues that the ALJ
improperly evaluated her credibility.
After reviewing the briefs, we AFFIRM for the reasons stated by the court below. See
Hull v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 12-14385 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 19, 2013).
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?